The sanctuaries and sanctuary seekers of mediaeval England

?VT^ -TV TT->-^ » 1
r\T^ TV T' T" \-r » 1

l^J" ^ UNIVERSITY

HV8654 ES^Ce?"""'"'"" ''"""^

DATE DUE

m-^

►--iS^^H^,,...

'^'^,.

"^.^^.-

■^

ft'

ncN-

ir^^-MSB

^

if

m^-"

k^!5^^

1 a

'SfmJ

(pi>»

^^

S^SHftib.

ll^

("•rri J!

SifesB^

t. .^.

^/A^

fi -

CAYLOflO

Fnii'fcifiHfl

PRINTCD IN L' S A,

THE SANCTUARIES AND SANCTUARY
SEEKERS OF MEDIAEVAL ENGLAND

Violation of Sanctuary. Murder of Arciiuisuop Bkcket.
(From an early thirleenlh cenlury Psalter. Harl. AJS., 5102.)

Cornell University
Library

The original of tiiis book is in
tine Cornell University Library.

There are no known copyright restrictions in
the United States on the use of the text.

http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924030330777

THE SANCTUARIES

AND SANCTUARY SEEKERS
OF MEDIi^VAL ENGLAND

BY

REV. J. CHARLES COX, LL.D., F.S.A.

Author of " Derbyshire Churches" (4 vols.), " How to Write the History of a Parish
(5th Edition), " English Church Furniture," " Royal Forests of England"
" Parish Registers of England," Editor of "Antiquary's
Boolis," " County Churches," &c.

WITH COLOURED FRONTISPIECE, 20 FULL-PAGE PLATES
AND 12 LINE DRAWINGS

LONDON: GEORGE ALLEN & SONS

44 & 45 RATHBONE PLACE

1911

[AH rights reserved]

Printed by Ballantyne, Hanson &' Co.
At the Ballantyne Press, Edinbtu-gh

TO MY FRIEND

THE REV. CANON NOLLOTH,

FOR THIRTY YEARS

THE FAITHFUL CUSTODIAN OF

BEVERLEY MINSTER,

THE GREATEST OF ENGLAND'S HISTORIC SANCTUARIES,

THESE PAGES ARE, BY KIND PERMISSION,

DEDICATED

PREFACE

My interest was first aroused in the question
of sanctuary rights in medieval England by
inquiries that were made of me by the late
Mr. Mazzinghi, Librarian of the William Salt
Library, Stafford, in 1886-87. ^ ^^^ ^^ that
time the pleasure of the friendship of that
gentleman, as I was a member of the editorial
committee of the Salt Archseological Society.
Mr. Mazzinghi published a short treatise on
this subject in 1887, and it has up till now
remained the only English book dealing exclu-
sively with Sanctuaries. It is doing no injustice
to that work to say, notwithstanding its obvious
research, that the treatment is scanty and at
times inaccurate.

Having occasion six years ago to consult
various old Assize Rolls, my interest in this
fascinating and much neglected side of England's
social and religious life, extending over several
centuries, became revived. From time to time
documents have been consulted, with the result
that the present book is submitted to the public.
It makes no pretence to be exhaustive ; many
illustrations of sanctuary life and sanctuary

viii PREFACE

seeking have been omitted for the sake of
space, and to prevent it becoming a mere dry
chronicle. Very possibly, too, I may have
overlooked certain sources of information which
ought to have been examined. I shall be only
too glad if any reader will kindly assist me in
this matter, or point out any errors. The chief
sources of information are to be found in the
Assize and Coroners' Rolls, in the Patent and
Close Rolls, and in the Episcopal Registers.
As to the first of these sources, it is much to
be regretted that both the Assize and Coroners'
Rolls of the Public Record Office now extant
are so very fitful in occurrence and so com-
paratively few in number. Moreover, both
these classes of documents are so irregular in
fashion, that it is apparently a haphazard matter
whether they include or exclude sanctuary cases.
The only provincial records with which I am
acquainted containing any sanctuary matter of
value, are the wonderfully fine collection of city
muniments at Norwich, which have been lately
so excellently calendared by Messrs. Hudson and
Tingey.

With regard to extracts from Episcopal
Registers, which relate almost exclusively to
violations of sanctuary, it may be as well to
point out to hasty readers or to those apt to
arrive at speedy conclusions, that such entries
do not in the least prove that these breaches

PREFACE

IX

of the Church's privileges were frequent ;
contrariwise these actions were exceedingly
rare. For every violation of sanctuary, there
were hundreds of cases wherein its privi-
leges were profoundly respected, and carried out
after the accustomed fashion. The bishops'
scribes naturally only made entries when the
usual order was broken through and the de-
linquents had to be punished. It was exactly
the same with the occasional cases of monastic
scandals which had to be for a like reason
entered ; and yet there are still writers who try
to find the ear of the public in their wholesale
denunciation of the monastic religious life, and
who in their blindness decide to ignore the
innumerable episcopal visits to the religious
houses where the result was omnia bene.

Much confusion has hitherto existed on the
question of sanctuary, by failing to distinguish
between the sanctuary rights prevailing, for a
limited time, in every consecrated church or
chapel with their surrounding graveyards, and
the chartered sanctuary rights of a lifetime
existing in connection with certain favoured
minsters or abbeys and their surroundings,
of which Beverley and Durham are the best
known examples. I hope that these pages
may help to dispel mistakes occasionally made
by able writers, and particularly by some of the
best of our novelists. Possibly, too, this book

X PREFACE

may be of some small service in saving' artists
from blunders. On several occasions, during
comparatively recent years, the walls of even
the Royal Academy have been decked with
pictures bearing on sanctuary subjects, which
have shown a more or less complete misap-
prehension of its true operation. To Mr. Ralph
Hedley my sincere thanks are due for gener-
ously allowing the reproduction in this book of
two of his admirable picture illustrations of
sanctuary incidents ; and yet he will, I hope,
forgive me for mentioning that there is the
same blemish in each, for every one in mediaeval
England knew full well that the Church never
suffered any sanctuary seeker to approach who
bore in his hand or on his person any kind of a
weapon.

Among others to whom I wish to express
gratitude. Professor Trenholme of the Univer-
sity of Missouri occupies the first place. By
a most curious coincidence I heard, in the
autumn of 1909, from the Professor making
inquiries as to the possible publication in England
of a book of his on this particular subject. It was
just at this time that my own projected and half-
finished book had assumed a definite shape, had
secured a publisher, and had been given a title
almost exactly similar to the one selected by the
Professor. Finding, however, that my scheme
was the nearest completion, Mr. Trenholme

PREFACE xi

most courteously and generously gave up his
own idea. He then drew my attention to an
interesting and helpful brochure of his own on
Sanctuaries, printed recently in the first volume
of " University of Missouri Studies," with which
I was not previously acquainted. He also
pointed out to me a valuable article in volume 50
of the Revue Historique, by the late M. Andre
Reville, on that remarkable accompaniment of
sanctuary seeking in England, termed the
Abjuration of the Realm, a custom almost
unknown on the continent.

It is a further pleasure to express my gratitude
for help and encouragement to the Rev. Dr.
Gee, Master of University College, Durham,
and to the Rev. Canon Nolloth, Vicar of Beverley
Minster.

Genuine assistance has been given me by one
of my sons in making transcripts, by two of
my sons in the dry work of proof-reading,
and by one of my daughters in the making of
the index. To my publishers, too, and to their
manager, I wish to offer my thanks for patience
and consideration.

J. C. C.

Lon(Ston Avenue, Sydenham,
December 1910.

CONTENTS

CHAPTER I

ENGLISH SANCTUARY LAWS AND CUSTOMS

PAGE

The origin of Sanctuaries — Cities of refuge — Sanctuary among the
Greeks and Romans — The immunity of Christian churches — The
Theodosian Code — The Council of Orange — Sanctuary in England
— Laws of Ethelbert, Ine, Alfred, Athelstan, Ethelred, and Canute
— Laws attributed to Edward the Confessor and William the Con-
queror — Anglo-Norman development — Abjuration of the realm —
The treatises of Bracton, Britton, and Fleta — Pardon for abjurors —
The case of John Lengleyse — Warding the sanctuary man — Statute
of Edward II. — Clerks not compelled to abjure — Statute of 1379
as to sanctuary debtors — The Mirror oj Justice — Ports of embarka-
tion for abjurors — The dress of abjurors — Beheaded when straying
— The number of sanctuary men — The Chartered Sanctuaries . i

CHAPTER II

HISTORICAL INCIDENTS

The murder of St. Thomas of Canterbury — The forcible withdrawal
of Geoffrey, Archbishop of York, from sanctuary — Hubert Walter,
Archbishop of Canterbury, made Justiciar — The setting on fire of
St. Mary le Bow to drive William Fitz Osbert out of sanctuary
— Hubert de Burgh takes sanctuary in various places in 1232-3 —
Flagrant violations — The Westminster Abbey violation of 1378
— Sanctuary under the Wars of the Roses — After the battle of
Tewkesbury — An Oxford University incident .... 34

CHAPTER III

THE SANCTUARY OF WESTMINSTER

No special sanctuary building — Stow's Survey — The murder of Hawley
in the quire, 1378 — The abbot defies Parliament in 1388 — The
case of Sir Robert Tresilian — Confession of John Paule, an abbey

xiv CONTENTS

PAGE

servant — ^John Russell, slanderer, voluntarily leaves sanctuary —
The Duchess of Gloucester disbarred from sanctuary — Sanctuary
violated in 1454 in the person of the Duke of Exeter — A com-
panion of Jack Cade at Westminster — Edward IV. 's Queen in
sanctuary, 1470 — Birth of Edward V. — The coup d'etat of 1483 — The
widowed Queen again in sanctuary — The boy Edward V. leaves
sanctuary and is murdered — The oath of a Westminster fugitive
— Historical MSS. Commission — Skelton, the poet laureate —
Sanctuary rights destroyed by Henry VIH., but re-established
under Mary — Abbot Feckenham's procession — Acts of Privy
Council temp. Mary^Sanctuary again abolished by Elizabeth . 48

CHAPTER IV

THE SANCTUARY OF ST. MARTIN LE GRAND

The Collegiate Church founded in 1056 — Wide privileges granted by
the Conqueror — Irregularity of the canons reflected in the conduct
of the sanctuary men — The grave charges of 1403 — The results of
Kneve's thefts forfeited to the Dean — Conflict between Dean
Bourchier and the Mayor of London, 1430 — Grave dispute with
the Mayor and Corporation in 1440 — Important pleadings of Dean
Cawdray and the Corporation — William Cayme, an associate of
Jack Cade, and Sir William Oldhall, ex-Speaker of the House of
Commons, in sanctuary — Lawlessness in 1454-5 redressed by
ordinances of 1456-7 — Statutes of 1463 and 1477 against debased
jewellery, exempting St. Martin's — Bishop of Ely in sanctuary,
1471 — Michael Forrest, one of the murderers of the two young
princes, died here — Henry VII. 's violation of this sanctuary —
United to Westminster Abbey — The College confiscated to the
Crown in 1 548 — Subsequent abuses of the site — Granted to the
Post Office in 1815 7^

CHAPTER V

THE SANCTUARY OF DURHAM

Death of St. Cuthbert, and burial at Lindisfarne — Sanctity attached to
his body — The monks, driven forth by the Danes, at length find a
resting-place at Chester le Street — Claim of sanctuary — The see
and St. Cuthbert's body moved to Durham in tenth century
— Reginald of Durham's Life and Miracles of St. Cuthbert —
The hunted stag of 1 165 — Violation of the sanctuary, and
murder of Bishop Watcher — Analysis of the registers of sanctuary
seekers — Extract from The Rites of Durham — " Sanctuary
knockers" .... ... ....qc

CONTENTS XV

CHAPTER VI

THE SANCTUARY OF BEVERLEY

PAGE

The sanctuary, with its boundaries, founded by Athelstan — The Frith
Stool — Remains of the boundary crosses — Alured of Beverley's
history — St. John of Beverley — Athelstan's visit to Beverley — The
register of sanctuary seekers, their offences and occupations —
Three women fugitives — The instruments of homicide — Two
entries in English — The oath of the sanctuary man — List of
counties whence fugitives came — York episcopal registers — Town
records as to the sanctuary men or Grithmen — Suppression of this
sanctuary under Henry VIII. — Its revival under Queen Mary . 126

CHAPTER Vn

OTHER NORTHERN SANCTUARIES

York and Southwell — The Priory of Hexham — The Collegiate Church
of Ripon — The Priory of Tynemouth — The Priory of Wetherhal —
The Priory of Armathwaite — The Church of Norham , . .150

CHAPTER Vin

SANCTUARY AT BEAULIEU AND OTHER CISTERCIAN ABBEYS

Beaulieu Abbey — Case of William Wawe, 1427 — ^John Colles, a fraudulent
executor — Countess of Exeter and Queen Margaret at Beaulieu —
Thomas Croft, the Wichwood Ranger, 1491 — Perkin Warbeck,
1496-9 — The Beaulieu Sanctuary Men at the suppression — General
claim of Sanctuary by Cistercian Houses — Statute sanctioned by
repeated papal authority — Letter of Archbishop Pecham —
Remarkable case at Waverley Abbey — The Cheshire Abbey of
Vale Royal — Tintern Abbey . . . . . . .183

CHAPTER IX

CHARTERED SANCTUARIES {continued)

Battle Abbey — Itinerant Sanctuary — The Abbey of Colchester — The
Abbey of Ramsey— The Abbey of Croyland — The Abbey of
Glastonbury — The Abbey of Gloucester — The Abbey of Bury St.
Edmunds — The Liberty of Culham, Oxfordshire — The Church of
Abbots Kerswell — The Priory of Leominster — The Cathedral
Church of Lincoln — St. Hugh's claim of 1 199 — Sanctuary violation
at Brackley — Sanctuary granted to the close of Lincoln — Pardon to
canons of Lincoln for illegal claim. 195

xvi CONTENTS

CHAPTER X

TWO CORNISH SANCTUARIES

PAGE

St. Buryan or Buriana — Athelstan's vow when conquering Cornwall,
936 — Leland's account — The case of Ivo Texton, 1278 — The
building termed " Sanctuary " at Boslivan — Numerous ancient
crosses in the parish — Date of crosses with Our Lord in short
tunic — Sanctuary of Padstow or Petrockstow, founded by Athel-
stan — St. Petrock — Various crosses — Alderstowe, the usual
mediaeval name — Assize Rolls of 1283 — Many fugitives to the
sanctuary and port of Padstow — Jurisdiction of Prior of Bodmin
— Case of Richard de Pentenyn . 214

CHAPTER XI

SANCTUARY INCIDENTS IN CITIES

The City of London, 123 1 -1555— The City of Canterbury, 1273-1426—
City of Norwich Coroners and Assize Rolls, 1267-1464 — Norwich
Cathedral Sanctuary — Borough Customs of Waterford, Bury St.
Edmunds, Fordwich, Dover, Hastings, and Rye .... 227

CHAPTER XII

EPISCOPAL REGISTERS

Worcester — Hereford — London — Durham — Winchester — Chichester

—Ely 243

CHAPTER XIII

THE PATENT AND CLOSE ROLLS

Pardon of an abjuror who had taken part in a duel — Grant of the
chattels of an abjuror — Pardon, for a fine of 300 marks, for a
Dorchester sanctuary seeker — Pardon for sanctuary violation in
Cornwall — Pardon of parish clerk of Tutbury for killing a

supposed sanctuary seeker — Violation of sanctuary at Stafford

Restoration to sanctuary at Windsor — Restoration to sanctuary
at Chichester — Commission as to beheading of sanctuary men at
Windsor — Restoration to sanctuary at Escrick, Yorks — Restoration
to sanctuary at Heacham, Norwich — Commission as to violence to
coroner and sanctuary seeker at Sedgeford, Norfolk— Commission
as to gross violation of sanctuary at Aylesbury — Delivery to the
Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of Worcester of a clerk

CONTENTS xvii

in sanctuary at Ely Cathedral — Pardon to a sanctuary seeker at
Cirencester for false oath — Violation of sanctuary at Tutbury —
Question of warding a sanctuary man at Huntingdon — Sanctuary
at St. Margaret's, Southwark ....... 261

CHAPTER XIV

ASSIZE AND coroners' ROLLS

Pleas of the Crown, 1200-1225 — Coroners' Rolls from 1265 to 1413,
cited hy Professor Gross — Staffordshire Assize Roll, 1271-2 —
Derbyshire Assize Rolls of 1265-8 and 1329-30 — Wilts Assize
Roll, 1267-8 — Northumberland Assize Rolls of 1256 and 1279 —
Raids of Scotch robbers, and abjuration of their own country —
Dorsetshire Assize Roll of 12S0 — Sanctuary at Kingston-on-Thames,
1262-3 — Remarkable Case at Wilton, 1358 — Two Oxford Incidents,
1343 and 1346, from Coroners' Rolls — Coroners' Rolls for the city
of York, 1349-1359 — Hertfordshire Assize Roll, 1247-8 — Somer-
setshire Assize Rolls, 1243 and 1280 — Devonshire Assize Roll,
1237-8 — Assize Rolls of Cornwall, 12S3-4 and 1302-3 — The
nature of Assize Rolls and of Coroners' Rolls .... 270

CHAPTER XV

WALES, SCOTLAND, AND IRELAND
Wales, Scotland, and Ireland 308

CHAPTER XVI

THE DECAY AND EXTINCTION OF SANCTUARIES

Henry VII. and papal restriction of sanctuary — Statutes 4 Henry VIII.
— Abjurors to be branded on the thumb, 1529 — Abjuration to other
countries prohibited in 1530-1 — Traitors excluded from sanctuary,
1534 — Qxomvi&VCs Remembrancer — "The Saying of Thomas Wolff "
— Protest of the Pilgrimage of Grace — Sanctuary case at Knowle —
The establishment of eight sanctuary towns — The substitution of
Chester for Manchester, and of Stafford for Chester — Legislation
under Edward VI., Mary, and Elizabeth — Extinction of all sanc-
tuaries under James I.— Alleged claim of sanctuary in 1636—
Reflections of Mazzinghi, Stanley, and Hallam — The poet
Drayton 3i9

APPENDIX • ■ 335

INDEX 337

b

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

PLATES

Murder of Archbishop Becket Frontispiece

{From an early X'^th cent. Psalter)

Facing page

The Site of the Martyrdom 34

{From a f koto by F. Frith b' Co. , Ltd.)

The Quire of Westminster Abbey 50

{From a photo by F. Frith 6^ Co., Ltd.)

Plan of St. Martin's le Grand, 1598 94

{From. S tow's " Survey of London ")

Sanctuary Seeker, Durham 108

{From a fainting by Mr. Ralph Hedley, R.B.A.)

Beverley Minster, N.W 126

{From a photo by Mr. Charles Goulding)

Facsimile of part of Beverley Sanctuary Register, 1478 . . 136
{Fj'OTn Harl. MSS. , 4292)

Southwell Minster 150

{From a photo by F. Frith <3^ Co., Ltd.)

Sanctuary Seeker, Hexham 156

{From a painting by Mr. Ralph Hedley, R.B.A.)

Ripon Minster, E 164

{From a print, 1790)

Tynemouth Priory 170

{From a print, 1813)

Wetherhal Priory 176

{From a print, 1778)

Beaulieu Abbey, the Cloisters 188

{From a photo by F. Frith (r Co., Ltd. )

Colchester Abbey, the Gateway 198

{From a photo by Jarrold &■ Sons, Ltd. )
xix

XX LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Facing page
Croyland Abbey 200

{From a photo by Mr. Aymer Vallance)

Glastonbury Abbey, Chape! of St. Joseph 202

{Froin a print, 1813)

Culham, Oxfordshire 206

(From a photo by H. W. Taunt &= Co.]

Lincoln Minster, S.W 212

[From a print, c. 1825)

The Church of St. Gregory, Norwich 236

[From a photo by Jarrold 6^ Sons, Ltd. )

Facsimile of part of a Coroners' Roll for City of York, 1349-59 296
Facsimile of part of Cornwall Assize Roll, 1283-84 . . . 302

ILLUSTRATIONS IN THE TEXT
By Miss M. E. Purser

Durham " Sanctuary Knocker " .

Closing Ring, St. Nicholas, Gloucester

Closing Ring, All Saints, York .

The Frith Stool, Beverley .

The Frith Stool, Hexham .

Early Cross, Hexham .

The Monks' Stone, Tynemouth .

The Sanctuary Cross, Armathwaite

Initial Letter of Battle Abbey Charter

Ancient Cross^ St. Buryan .

Ancient Cross, Padstow

Closing Ring, St. Gregory, Norwich

" Determynatyon of the Sanctuaries

PAGE

121
122
123
129
158
162
167
1 80

I9S
218
222

235
326

SANCTUARIES

CHAPTER I

ENGLISH SANCTUARY LAWS AND CUSTOMS

The origin of Sanctuaries — Cities of refuge — Sanctuary among the
Greeks and Romans — The immunity of Christian churches —
The Theodosian Code — The Council of Orange — Sanctuary in
England — Laws of Ethelbert, Ine, Alfred, Athelstan, Ethelred,
and Canute — Laws attributed to Edward the Confessor and
William the Conqueror — Anglo-Norman development — Abjura-
tion of the realm — The treatises of Bracton, Britton, and Fleta
— Pardon for abjurors — The case of John Lengleyse — Warding
the sanctuary man — Statute of Edward II. — Clerks not com-
pelled to abjure — Statute of 1379 as to sanctuary debtors — The
Mirror of Justice — Ports of embarkation for abjurors — The
dress of abjurors — Beheaded when straying — The number of
sanctuary men — The Chartered Sanctuaries.

The avenging of the death of a murdered or
slain relative by the nearest of kin was, and to
a certain extent still is, a common practice of
mankind among uncivilised races. The spirit,
however, of all legislation has been to restrain this
license of punishment, and to limit the duration
of feuds. Hence came about the establishment
by the Mosaic code of the six Levitical cities of
refuge, appointed for the refuge of the involun-
tary homicide until released from banishment by
the death of the high priest.

It was, too, a feeling of humanity that gave

A

2 SANCTUARIES

birth to the asylums of the Greeks, places origi-
nally designed to shelter the unfortunate from the
revenge of the pursuer, but which, like their
Christian successors, were ere long used to save
the life and limb of a criminal from the severities
of the law, substituting in its place a modified
form of banishment or extended imprisonment.
The most famous of these asylums was that of
Diana of Ephesus. The Romans fully recognised
the peculiar sacredness attaching to particular
places, as well as to the altars of their temples
or the statues of their emperors, questions upon
which whole treatises have been written.

The reverence due to the inner sanctuary or
Holy of Holies of the Jewish Temple had its
reflection in the Christian Church so soon as the
New Faith emerged from active persecution.
Throughout Christendom the very name of
sanctuary still clings to the easternmost part of
the chancel, which contains the high altar.

In all probability the custom of allowing
Christian churches to offer protection to crimi-
nals and other fugitives in danger of life or limb
within their walls or precincts, came into exist-
ence from the time of Constantine's Edict of
Toleration, a.d. 303. So soon as Christianity
became the State religion, it is apparent that the
protection afforded by churches was accepted as
something more sacred and of greater value than
the fitful asylum of temples and statues under
the old imperial law. There are no known laws

LAWS AND CUSTOMS 3

about it earlier than the Theodosian Code, but
when Theodosius the Great in 392 enacted a
law concerning asylum in a church, this was
done in order to explain and regulate a privilege
already recognised and well established. Thus
Gregory Nazianzen tells, in his Hfe of St. Basil,
how that saint protected a widow who fled to
the altar against the violence offered by the
Governor of Pontus ; and the like is reported by
Paulinus of St. Ambrose. At first only the
altar with the inner fabric of the church was
regarded as a place of refuge ; but about 450
Theodosius the Younger made a new law where-
by the limits of immunity were extended beyond
the walls of the actual church to the walls of the
churchyard or precincts, including the houses of
bishops and clergy, cloisters, courts, and ceme-
teries. The constitutions of Theodosius the
Younger were confirmed by Pope Leo, who
further enjoined that an advocate of the Church
was to examine those who sought refuge and take
action in conformity with the evidence adduced.
" The early Christian Church," as Professor
Trenholme remarks, " was strongly opposed to
the shedding of blood, and ready to do all in its
power to prevent violence which might result in
bloodshed. Thus the clergy speedily became
the great intermediaries between criminals and
those who desired vengeance, and acted as am-
bassadors of mercy before the throne of justice.
Fugitives who had taken refuge in Christian

4 SANCTUARIES

churches were interceded for, slaves fleeing from
cruel masters were protected, unfortunate debtors
in danger of imprisonment were allowed tem-
porary shelter until a compromise could be
reached. All this, no doubt, besides tempering
the administration of public and private law,
increased the reverence for human life in the
popular mind, and associated the Church and
religion with ideas of sanctity and mercy."

By the Theodosian Code, public debtors,
that is, those who embezzled or kept back by
fraud State dues, were excluded from sanctuary
right. Nor could the immunity of the Church
be enjoyed by Jews pretending to turn Chris-
tians to avoid their debts, nor by any heretics
or apostates. The laws of Justinian, of the be-
ginning of the sixth century, excluded from
sanctuary murderers, adulterers, and ravishers of
virgins. The Church from the outset found it
difficult to discriminate between the classes of
delinquents seeking protection, and from early
days extended shelter to those who were in fact
murderers as well as to those guilty of man-
slaughter.

The Council of Orange, 441, ordered that no
fugitive seeking sanctuary should be surrendered,
and in 5 1 1 the Synod of Orleans extended the
privilege to the bishop's residence and to thirty-
five paces beyond the walls of the building. The
later canon law of Gratian and the papal decretals
granted protection to all criminals, saving night

LAWS AND CUSTOMS 5

robbers, highway robbers, and those guilty of
grave crimes in churches. The Church refused
to surrender all other fugitives unless an oath
was taken freeing them from death or mutilation.

There was another general condition of
primitive origin in connection with sanctuary
seekers throughout Christendom, namely, that
they were not to fly with any kind of arms into
a church or its precincts.

It should also be mentioned that the Theo-
dosian Code prohibited the feeding and lodging
of fugitives within the actual churches, but
permitted it in the precincts or churchyards.
Indeed this was alleged by Theodosius the
Younger as the main reason for extending
sanctuary bounds, namely, " that men might not
have the excuse of fear to make them eat or lodge
in the church, which he thought to be things not
so decent in their own nature, nor agreeable to
the state of religion and the respect and reverence
that was due to churches, as places appropriated
to God, and set apart for his service." ^

It is highly probable that the right of church
asylum was to some extent exercised in England
during the later days of the Roman occupation,
but it is not until after the reconversion of Eng-
land towards the close of the sixth century that
any definite proof of its operation in the British

^ On the whole question of the early origin of sanctuary privileges
in the Catholic Church, see Bingham's Antiquities of the Christian
Church, Bk. viii. ch. ii ; also De Jure Asylorum (1623) by Georgius
Rittershusius.

6 SANCTUARIES

Isles is forthcoming. Soon after his conversion
and baptism, in 597, Ethelbert, King of Kent,
drew up the earhest known Anglo-Saxon code
of laws. By the very first of these laws, the
sanctity of churches is strongly enforced ; it briefly
lays down that the violation of church /rz^"/^ is to
be double that of an ordinary breach of the king's
peace. There was no necessity for any further
declaration as to church sanctuary in this much
condensed code ; doubtless the missionaries from
Rome would instruct Ethelbert as to the already
well-established rules that affected the Christian
churches of all lands.

Throughout the Anglo-Saxon period, the
distinction between the king's peace, as answer-
able by penalties for securing the general safety
of his subjects, and the Church's peace {Jrith or
fryth), whereby clemency and mercy were freely
extended, was frequently demonstrated both in
law and practice. There was also another kind
of Royal Peace whereby more permanent and ex-
tended immunity was granted by rulers in token
of the special sanctity of the shrines of notable
saints, but the administration of which was left
entirely in the hands of the ministers or officials
of a particular minster. This form of immu-
nity came to be known as Chartered Sanctuary,
and was entirely local in its operation. Two
of the most noted examples were Beverley and
Durham, which are subsequently noted at length.
Very great confusion and misunderstanding have

LAWS AND CUSTOMS 7

often been caused by writers failing to dis-
criminate between particular cases of chartered
sanctuary, and those that pertained to every
consecrated church and churchyard.

About the year 680, Ine, King of Wessex,
put forth a code of laws, whereof the fifth
chapter distinctly provides for sanctuary seekers:
" If any one be guilty of death, and he flee to a
church, let him have his life, and make hot (satis-
faction or fine) as the law may direct him. If
any one put his hide in peril {i.e. commit a crime
punishable by stripes), and flee to a church, be
the scourging forgiven him."

Two centuries later, namely, in 887, Alfred
the Great drew up a further code of laws, three
of which (Nos. 2, 5, and 4) make special refer-
ence to church frith or sanctuary. There is a
certain amount of obscurity as to the precise
meaning of parts of Alfred's enactments on this
question (see Thorpe's Ancient Laws) ; but these
points are clear. Sanctuary seekers were to be
protected for seven days, and under certain cir-
cumstances for thirty days. Any one harming
a fugitive during these days of grace was to
make hot or compensation for the injury accord-
ing to the nature of the offence, and also to pay
1 20s. to the kinsfolk of the fugitive for the
breach of church frith. The special sanctity
of the " mynster-house " was also recognised by
Alfred's laws.

King Athelstan, in 930, provided that any

8 SANCTUARIES

thief or robber flying to the king, to the bishop,
or to any church, was to have immunity for nine
days ; if he fled to an alderman, an abbot, or a
thane, three days. During that period the person
of the deHnquent was to be inviolable.

By the laws of King Ethelred, c. looo, a
sanctuary seeker, who had committed a capital
offence, saved his life, but he had either to
pay the proper wergild or compensation for his
victim's life, or else go into perpetual imprison-
ment. If he freed himself by due payment, he
had either to find a bondsman for his future good
conduct, or else to take an oath that he would
never steal, drive off cattle, or avenge his punish-
ment. If he broke his oath, there would be no
second resort to sanctuary. By later legislation
under Ethelred, in 1014, a definite scale for vio-
lations of church frith was drawn up, whereby
the penalty in the violation of a chief miinster
was to be_^5, intermediate sums for an ordinary
minster or church, and only 30s. for a field church
having no burial-place. Canute's laws were of
a like character.'

It is not right here to cite the sanctuary
regulations attributed to Edward the Confessor,
as it is now known that the so-called Laws of
the Confessor really belong to the twelfth cen-
tury or later.

Before proceeding to the legislation of

' See throughout Ancient Laws and Institutes of England, issued
by the Record Commission in 1840.

LAWS AND CUSTOMS 9

Norman and later days, it may be well to make
brief reference to a certain grievous violation
of sanctuary which occurred during the Anglo-
Saxon period, as recorded by William of Malmes-
bury/ In the year 1004 certain Danes con-
demned to death took sanctuary in the nunnery
of St. Frideswide at Oxford ; whereupon the
English were so enraged that they set fire to the
monastery, which was burnt down, and the fugi-
tives perished in the flames. Ample restitution
was soon afterwards made, so far as it could be
effected, by the rebuilding of the monastery and
the increase of its endowments.

In the code of Anglo-Norman laws, which
used to be attributed to William the Conqueror
and are known as Leis Williame, but which most
likely belong to the twelfth century, we find a
law which marks a continuance of the sanctuary
legislation of Ethelred and Canute. The very
first enactment treats of the peace and immunity
of the Church, and provides that any one accused
of any kind of crime who flies to a church is to
be held secure of life and limb. Any one laying
violent hands on a fugitive in a cathedral or abbey
church was subject to a fine of iocs ; in a parish
church, 70s ; and in a chapel, los. In the Con-
queror's statutes, given in the Textus "^ffensis,
there is no mention of sanctuary ; but as chapter
seven confirms the old laws, this would include
previous sanctuary. That the Conqueror had

^ De Gestis Pontificum, lib. iv. c. 178.

lo SANCTUARIES

strong feelings in favour of sanctuary is obvious
from the extraordinary privileges in that direction
conferred on Battle Abbey, of which particulars
are given in a later section of this book. As the
lav^s attributed to the Confessor are now accepted
as of twelfth century date, the definite references
therein to sanctuary may be accepted as per-
taining to early Norman rule. The fifth section
of this code provides that those in sanctuary were
not to be removed save by the priest or his
ministers. Immunity was also extended to the
priest's house and its courtyard or entrance. No
fugitive was to retain stolen property ; if he
brought any with him, it was to be restored to
the owner. In cases where a criminal resorts
several times [sepius) to the church or priest's
house, he is to forswear the province, and if he
returned no one should presume to receive him,
excepting by the consent of the king's justices.

In this last clause is the earliest known refer-
ence to the formal Abjuration of the Realm by
the sanctuary fugitive, which came into precise
operation in the beginning of the thirteenth cen-
tury. But in this case it is the forswearing of
the province rather than the kingdom, and no
definite conditions are stated. Abjuration was
of Anglo-Norman origin and peculiar to Eng-
land ; it was a development of outlawry which
was well known in Anglo-Saxon days. Any
man committing a grave offence, who fled from
justice, was as a rule proclaimed an outlaw ;

LAWS AND CUSTOMS ii

he was outside the pale of the law's protection
and his goods were forfeited to the Crown. The
outlaw might be killed or hunted by any one
whilst on English soil with impunity, and his only
safety was to be found in some other kingdom.
Abjuration, on the other hand, was always allied
with sanctuary fugitives ; the process before the
coroner was far simpler and more speedy than
in outlawry, and the person of the abjuror was
sacred, under certain conditions, whilst seeking a
port of embarkation.

When, under Norman rule, sanctuary rights
were so frequently used in the disturbed con-
dition of the kingdom, it became necessary to
resort to more precise methods of protecting the
ordinary church fugitive from the secular arm
when the days of i^efuge expired. Hence arose
the abjuration of the realm made on oath by
the fugitive who declined to submit to trial, or
whose prosecutor could not be pacified. Cer-
tain casual and careless writers, exclusive of
novelists who are ever ingenious in the con-
struction of their own laws, have assumed that
abjuration, as a sequel to sanctuary-seeking, pre-
vailed throughout Christendom, and that conti-
nental countries were in the general habit— to use
modern parlance — " of dumping their aliens " on
our shores, in the same way as England exiled
large numbers of her fugitive criminals to the
shores of France or the Low Countries. But this
was far from being the case. It has been pointed

12 SANCTUARIES

out by an able French scholar, the late M. Andre
Reville,^ that this form of abjuration was essen-
tially English, and that so far as it prevailed, for a
time and irregularly, in Normandy, it has to be
considered as derived from England ; it was " an
insular institution transported to the Continent,
and not a continental practice brought into the
island by foreign invaders." ^

Abjuration of the realm followed the same
course as the pronouncement of ordinary out-
lawry in being inseparably connected with the
office of coroner. Although this part of their duty
is not distinctly defined in the Act of 4 Edward
I., De Officio Coronatoris, it is clearly laid down
in the three legal treatises of that reign known
respectively as Bracton, Britton, and Fleta. In
Britton's treatise, De Coronners, section 18 runs :
" We will also that the coroners receive the
confessions of felonies made by approvers in the
presence of the sheriff, whom we intend to be
his controller in every part of his office ; and let
them cause such confessions to be enrolled. And
when any man has fled to church, we will that
the coroner, as soon as he has notice of it, com-
mand the bailiff of the place that he cause the
neighbours and the four nearest townships (to
form a jury) to appear before him at a certain
day at the church where the fugitive shall be ;

' See an admirable article in Revue Historique, September 1892,
entitled Vabjuratio regni ; historie d'tine institution aiiglaise.
" Trenholme's Right of Sanctuary, 23.

LAWS AND CUSTOMS 13

and in their presence he shall receive the con-
fession of the felony ; and if the fugitive pray
to abjure our realm, let the coroner immediately
do w^hat is incumbent on him. But if he does
not pray abjuration, let him be delivered to the
township to be kept at their peril." ^

Bracton's De Corona, in the sixteenth chapter,
deals thus with sanctuary seekers : —

" There are some persons, who, when they
ought to be captured, flee to a church or other
religious or privileged place, and keep themselves
in the church, and in which case there is nothing
intermediate, except that they come within the
protection of the king to stand their trial, if
anybody wishes to accuse them, or that they
acknowledge the misdeed for which they keep
themselves in the church, and so he shall have
an election. And in which case, if having ac-
knowledged his misdeed he has elected to abjure
the realm, he ought to choose some port by
which he may pass to another land beyond the
realm of England, because he is not bound to
abjure the land and power of the king precisely,
but only the realm of England. And there
ought to be computed for him his reasonable
travelling expenses as far as that port, and he
ought to be interdicted from going out of the
king's highway, and from delaying anywhere for
two nights, and from entertaining himself any-
where, and from turning aside from the high

' Britton, edited and translated by F. M. Nichols (1865), i. 17.

14 SANCTUARIES

road except under great necessity or for the sake
of lodging for the night, but let him always con-
tinue along the straight road to the port, so that
he shall always be there on the appointed day,
and that he shall cross the sea as soon as he shall
find a ship, unless he shall be impeded by the
weather ; but if he does otherwise, he shall be
in peril."

As to the oath by which they shall abjure
the realm, Bracton continues : —

" Hear this, ye justices or ye coroners, that I
shall go forth from the realm of England, and
shall not return thither again, except with the
license of the lord the king or of his heirs, so
God me help. And in making this oath let no
mention be made of any impediment. But what
shall be said, where he has not wished to choose
any port .? because he may without a port and
sea go forth into another kingdom, and then it
may not be unfitly said, where it is said that he
has chosen a port, that he has chosen a passage
by such a vill, by the road which goes to Scot-
land or Ireland or elsewhere. But it is not
always necessary that he acknowledge the mis-
deed, for he may submit. If he has taken
refuge in the church after he has been con-
demned by the country, whether before judge-
ment or after it, or if he has fled to the church
when he has been captured in seysine, and in
none of those cases, when he has fled to the
church, can he remain for forty days in the

LAWS AND CUSTOMS 15

church, as some say, but forthwith on the com-
ing of the justiciaries or of the coroners he ought
to go forth and obey the law of the land. But
the space of forty days was to be allowed formerly
to the condemned according to the assize of
Clarendon, who, when they ought to go forth
from the realm, might have a delay of forty
days, and seek the subsidies of their friends.

"The Constitution was of this kind, that
although a person should purge himself by the
ordeal of water or of fire, he should nevertheless
abjure the realm, and he had that space on the
aforesaid occasion, which is not to be conceded
to others. But what if he, who has fled to the
church, is unwilling to leave it, can he be dragged
out forcibly by a lay hand ? Not, as it seems,
for this would be horrible and unhallowed. It
seems, therefore, that the ordinary of the place,
such as the archdeacon or his official, the dean
or the parson, may do this, and ought to compel
him to go forth, for the sword ought to assist
the sword, and the execution of the law works
no injury, and when such a person will not go
forth unless compelled, there is a vehement prOr
sumption against him, that he is an evil person,
and to maintain him in the church will be no-
thing else than (when he is a public robber) to
act in the highest degree against the peace and
against the king himself, who ought to protect
the peace for the security of all, and if the said
person cannot be compelled to go forth, at least

1 6 SANCTUARIES

when he has been in the church for one night
at most, he may maintain himself in the church
for forty days, and for a year, and for two years,
if this be the pleasure of the malefactor. What
therefore shall be done, when ordinaries are afraid
of irregularity, and laymen of excommunication ?
I see nothing else, than that they should deny
such a person victuals, so that he may go forth
gratuitously and seek what he has contemptuously
refused, and he, who after this has supplied
victuals to the said person, shall be taken to be
as it were an enemy of the king, and a presumer
against the peace of the king, and so let it be
done with all who ought to abjure the realm and
be sent into exile." ^

Pardon was occasionally obtained from the
Crown by abjurors who were permitted to return
to the realm. In subsequent extracts from the
Patent and Close Rolls instances are given of
such pardons being granted in 121 3 and in 1441
(pp. 262, 268), and various others occurred be-
tween these dates and subsequently.

A singular case came before Parliament in
1330. John Lengleyse, of Wyrhale, who had
slain the Mayor of Lynn, escaped to the sanc-
tuary of Holy Church, and abjured the realm
before the coroner. But after three years he
returned to England, was taken prisoner, and
endeavoured to appeal. One Allen de Tesdeyl

' Bracton, De Legibus et Consuetudinibus Anglia: (Rolls Series),
vol. ii. pp. 393-9-

LAWS AND CUSTOMS 17

had the appellant in charge, and took him from
county to county until they came to Yorkshire,
and there he caused to be indicted Peter de
Manby, John Mauliverer, and Geoffrey Dupsal,
and brought them to London (probably as wit-
nesses), where they awaited the return of Roger
de Mortimer, who was beyond the seas. In
this way Allen claimed to have spent all that
he had to the amount of 1000 marks, and
petitioned Parliament to make it good. But
the petition was not allowed.^

In considering the question of sanctuary in
England right through these pages, it must
always be borne in mind that the whole matter
involved a perpetual conflict between the State
and the Church. The Church was merciful,
and was ever desirous of saving at least the life
of the criminal ; but the State, in its punish-
ment of wrong-doers, must also be held to be
well within its rights in endeavouring to prevent
criminals from gaining access to sanctuaries, and
in jealously watching and warding the church
and churchyard wherein a fugitive had taken
refuge, lest the delinquent should escape other-
wise than by abjuration before the coroner. To
quicken the national pulse in the duly warding
of the consecrated area wherein the criminal
was immune, the township which permitted an
escape was invariably fined by the justices of
assize. The first reference to sanctuary in the

' Rolls of Parliajuent^ ii. 37.

B

1 8 SANCTUARIES

Statutes of the Realm is concerned with this ques-
tion of warding/ In i 3 1 5-1 6, in the first statute
of 9 Edward II., under the head oi Artkuli Cleri,
the tenth section runs as follows : —

" Also where some flying unto the Church,
abjure the Realm, according to the custom of
the Realm, and Laymen or their enemies do
pursue them, and pluck them from the King's
Highway, and they are hanged or beheaded ; and
whilst they be in the Church are kept by armed
men within the churchyard and sometime in
the Church, so straitly that they cannot de-
part from the hallowed Ground to empty their
Belly, and cannot be suffered to have necessaries
brought unto them for their living :

" The Answer. They that abjure the Realm
so long as they be in the Common Way, shall
be in the King's Peace, nor ought to be dis-
turbed of any Man; and when they be in the
Church, their keepers ought not to abide in
the Church yard, except Necessity or Peril of
Escape do require so. And so long as they be
in the Church, they shall not be compelled to
flee away, but they shall have Necessaries for
their Living, and may go forth to empty their
Belly. And the King's Pleasure is, that Thieves
or Appellors whensoever they will, may confess
their Offences unto Priests; but let the Con-
fessors beware that they do not erroneously
inform such Appellors."

' This subject of warding is also treated of in chapter xi.

LAWS AND CUSTOMS 19

Many difficulties and disputes arose as to
the question of warding the sanctuary man, and
there were diffisrent customs in different towns.
These are discussed and illustrated in chapter
xi. under London, Canterbury, and Norwich.
Some remarkable instances also occur on
the Assize and Coroners' Rolls in chapter xiv.,
notably at Oxford and at Northampton.

This warding led to so many misadventures
and disputes with the ecclesiastical authorities,
that in i 377 the clergy prayed Parliament that
such as fly to sanctuary may not be liable to
watch and ward.^

The statute of 9 Edward IL, already cited,
contains further reference to sanctuary and ab-
juration. The fifteenth section provides that a
clerk should not be compelled to abjure.

" Moreover, though a Clerk ought not to be
judged before a Temporal Judge, nor any thing
may be done against him that concerneth Life
or Member; nevertheless Temporal Judges cause
that Clerks fleeing unto the Church, and per-
adventure confessing their Offences, do abjure
the Realm, and for the same cause admit their
Abjuration, although hereupon they cannot be
their Judges, and so Power is wrongfully given
to Lay Persons to put to death such Clerks, if
such Persons chance to be found within the
Realm after their Abjuration; the Prelates and
Clergy desire such Remedy to be provided

'■ Rolls of Parliament, iii. 27.

SANCTUARIES

^rein, that the Immunity or Privilege of the
^hurch and Spiritual Persons may be saved and
unbroken.

"The Answer. A Clerk fleeing to the
Church for Felony, to obtain the Privilege of
the Church, if he affirm himself to be a Clerk,
he shall not be compelled to abjure the Realm;
but yielding himself to the Lzw of the Realm,
shall enjoy the Privilege of the Church, according

to the laudable custom of the Realm heretofore

d" 1
.

The question of abjuring by the clergy had
previously caused a difficulty in the reign of
Edward I. The following is from the Calendar
of the Close Rolls, 1286, July 5 : "To the keeper
of the pleas of the crown in the hundred of Welle
Wapentak. Oliver, Bishop of Lincoln, has shown
the king that whereas Richard de Scardeburgh,
chaplain, has fled to the church of Marton, in
that bishopric, for larceny committed by him,
and says that he is there prepared to abjure the
realm, to the prejudice of the liberty of the
church, and the bishop has besought the king
to cause the chaplain to be delivered to him as
diocesan, to be treated in accordance with the
liberty of the church without making abjura-
tion : as by the custom of the realm no one fleeing
to a church for his trespass ought to remain therein
more than forty days under the king's protec-
tion, the king orders the keeper to deliver the

' Statutes of the Realm (Rec. Com.), i- 172-3.

LAWS AND CUSTOMS 21

chaplain, if he have remained in the church for
40 days, to the bishop or his commissary to be
kept until the quinzaine of Michaelmas next, so
that, after the matter have been discussed before
the king's council, the chaplain shall be led back
to the church aforesaid to make such abjuration
in the keeper's presence if it ought to be made,
according to the decision of the king's council.
Witness : Edmund, Earl of Cornwall."

Later in the same reign the Close Rolls of
1299 again refer to the special treatment of clergy
in sanctuary : " To the sheriff of Salop. The
king learns by the information of R., bishop of
Hereford, that whereas John le Berner, a clerk
of his diocese, fled for sanctuary to the church
of the Austin Friars near Ludlow for a trespass
committed by him against the king's peace, cer-
tain men of the town of Ludlow pursued him and
withdrew him by force of arms from the church,
and bound him with chains, and sent him thus
bound to the prison of Shrewsbury Castle by the
coroner of the county, and that he is detained
for this and no other reason in that prison, to
the injury of the liberty of the church, for which
reason the bishop has besought the king to order
a remedy : the king orders the sheriff, if he finds
this true, to deliver the clerk from the said prison
and take him back to the church."

The grave abuses of sanctuary by debtors was
dealt with by Parliament in 1379. The statute
2 Richard IL, st. ii., c. 3, provides that in order

22 SANCTUARIES

to check all debtors who make feigned con-
veyances of goods or lands to their friends or
others, and then flee to chartered sanctuaries,
abiding there a long time, and taking profit of
their lands and goods by fraud and collusion,
thereby wronging their creditors, if sheriffs should
make return that they have not taken certain
debtors because they are in refuge in privileged
places, proclamation was to be made once a week,
for five weeks running, at the gate of the privi-
leged place, summoning such persons to appear
before the king's justices at a given date, and on
their failure to appear in person or by attorney,
judgment shall be given against them, together
with execution of their goods and lands. An
instance of this fivefold proclamation before the
gates of Colchester Abbey is subsequently cited
under chapter ix.

It may be well here to quote the important
passages relative to sanctuary in that book of
mysterious origin and doubtful authority, the
Mirror of Justice. It is now known that it was
written or compiled before 1290. The author-
ship and intention of the book remain a riddle,
but the probabilities are that it was composed
by one Andrew Horn, chamberlain of the city
of London, who died in 1328/

This is what the book has to say as to

^ See Dr. Holdsworth's History of English Law{igog), ii. 284-
90. Th^ Mirror of Justice was first printed in 1642, and translated
in 1646. The best edition is that of the Selden Society (1898), by
Mr. Whitaker, with an introduction by Professor Maitland.

LAWS AND CUSTOMS 2j

sanctuary in England, and in this particular the
writer may be taken as broadly accurate : —

" First : Sanctuary when not Allowed. — If any
fly to sanctuary, and there demand protection^
we are to distinguish : for if he be a common
thief, robber, murderer, or night walker, and be
known for such, and discovered by the people,
and of his pledges ; or if any one be convicted
for debt or other offence, upon his own con-
fession, and hath never abjured the realm, or
hath been exiled, banished, outlawed, or waived,
or if any one have offended in sanctuary or
joined upon this hope to be defended in sanc-
tuary, they may take him out thence, without
any prejudice or the franchise of sanctuary.

" Secondly : Sanctuary when Allowed. — But in
the right of offenders who, by mischance, fall
into an offence, mortal out of sanctuary, and
for true repentance run to monasteries, and com-
monly confess themselves sorrowful and repent.
King Henry II., at Clarendon (i 164), granted unto
them that they should be defended by the Church
for the space of 40 days, and ordained that the
town should defend such flyers for the whole
40 days, and send them to the Coroner at the
Coroner's view.

" 'Election. — It is in the election of the
offender to yield to the law, or to acknowledge
his offence to the Coroner and to the people,
and to waive the law. And if he yield him-
self to be tried by law, he is to be sent to the

24 SANCTUARIES

gaol, and to wait for either acquittal or con-
demnation.

" And if he confess a mortal offence, and desire
to depart the realm without desiring the tuition
of the Church, he ;s to go from the end of the
sanctuary ungirt in pure sackcloth, and there
swear that he will keep the straight path to such
a port, or such a passage which he hath chosen,
and will stay in no part two night together,
until that for his mortal offence, which he hath
confessed in the hearing of the people, he hath
avoided the realm, never to return during the
King's life without leave, so help him God and
the good Evangelists : and afterwards let him
make the sign of the cross and carry the same,
and the same is as much as if he were in the
protection of the Church.

" And if any one remain in sanctuary above
the 40 days, by so doing he is debarred of the
grant of abjuration if the fault be in him, after
which time it is not lawful for any one to give
him victuals. And although such be out of the
peace and the protection of the King, yet none
ought to dishearten them ; all are as if they were
in the protection of the Church, if they be not
found out of the highway, or wilfully break their
oath, or do other mischief in the highway."

Book v., at the end of the Mirror, gives a
list of " Certain Abuses held for Usages."

No. 23 states that " it is an abuse that felons
who abjure the realm are not allowed to choose

LAWS AND CUSTOMS 25

their own port of departure from the realm. It
is an abuse that ports are assigned to them and
their journeys Hmited."

No. 24 further adds that " it is an abuse that
these abjurors are compelled to wade into the
sea and raise hue over the sea, and that the foot-
paths that run beside the great roads are forbidden
them, and that they cannot use the roads and
hospices in the manner of pilgrims."

In one respect this highly interesting account
of sanctuaries gives a wrong impression. It
might be supposed from the phraseology used
that, on the death of the king in whose reign
abjuration was made, the exile was free to return.
Had this been the /case, there would have been
a striking analogy with the death of the high
priest and the Jewish cities of refuge ; but such
a custom did not prevail. The rule was that the
abjuration was lifelong, unless Crown pardon was
obtained.

As to the port of embarkation, Dover was
the most usual one assigned by the coroner, even
when it involved a journey of many days. From
this port the distance was shorter, and the vessels
more numerous than elsewhere, in order to gain
the shores of either France or Flanders. The
Coroners' Rolls not infrequently name the port
in cases of abjuration, but there is very rarely an
entry of this kind on the Assize Rolls.^ Although
Yorkshire was bordered by the sea, and there

* See chapter xiv.

26 SANCTUARIES

were many nearer ports, Dover was the one
generally selected for the delinquents of that
county. The days assigned for the journey to
Dover varied from fifteen to eight, whilst twelve
was of the most common occurrence. In a few
instances from the north of Yorkshire the abjuror
was directed to make his way to Berwick, whence
the exile was apparently at liberty to enter the
kingdom of Scotland instead of crossing the seas.
Two or three East Riding cases were dispatched
to Hull. Dover was the usual and almost in-
variable port from the midland counties of Derby,
Nottingham, Northampton, and Leicester, as well
as occasionally from Norfolk and Cambridge.

The following is a list of various ports for
the embarkation of abjurors which I have found
entered in Coroners' Rolls or in a few other offi-
cial records, in the order of their occurrence: —
on the coast line are : Berwick, Tynemouth, New-
castle-on-Tyne, Hull, Boston, Lynn, Yarmouth,
Ipswich, Orwell, Rochester, Sandwich, Dover,
Winchelsea, Portsmouth, Southampton, Ply-
mouth, Lostwithiel for Fowey, Looe, Padstow,
Ilfracombe, Bristol, Chester, and Lancaster. The
Ilfracombe case (chapter x.) is remarkable, for
it is implied that the abjuror was to proceed to
Wales. The solitary case that I have found of
Rochester occurs on a Nottingham roll of 1349,
when the delinquent was sent on an eight days'
journey from Newark.

With regard to the abjuror selecting his own

LAWS AND CUSTOMS 27

port, which appears from the Mirror of Justice
to have been the original custom, I have only
met with two instances wherein the granting
of such a choice is distinctly affirmed. One of
these occurred in the Hberty of St. Peter of
York, and was evidently accompanied by some
exceptional circumstances. The dehnquent not
only chose his own port, which was Dover, but
was apparently allowed the privilege of fixing
the length of his journey, taking the very wide
margin of forty days.

An imperfect Coroner's Roll, which covers a
considerable period of the reign of Edward III.,
has an interesting entry under the year 1362.
On Monday after the Feast of St. Bartholomew,
Walter, the baker of St. Oswalds, was found
dead in a suburb of Gloucester. Richard Spelby,
who had killed him with a knife, fled to the
church of the Blessed Virgin before the gate of
the abbey, and there remained until the Monday
after the Feast of St. Leodgarius (October 2) —
namely, for the full legal limit of forty days.
On this last date he abjured the realm, and the
coroner, instead of assigning him a port, gave
the fugitive the choice of a place of embarkation.
The port of Bristol was not unnaturally selected,
and his wish is recorded — the only time that I
have found an entry of this kind — that he might
proceed to France. Thereupon Richard set forth
for Bristol by the king's highway, through the
south gate, cross in hand {cruce in manu). It

28 SANCTUARIES

is impossible to resist the conclusion that coroners
must have occasionally assigned to the abjuror a
very distant port as an extra humiliating punish-
ment. Under no other plea does it seem possible
to understand why a Norwich coroner, in the
year 1295, should assign to one sanctuary keeper
the port of Portsmouth, giving him three weeks
in which to reach it, and in another case the port
of Southampton with a month for the journey.

The age and condition of the delinquent must
also have been taken into account, for varying
days are allowed for the same journey. Occa-
sionally the rate of progress for these unhappy
pedestrians was excessive, and would put a con-
siderable strain on modern athletes over a good
road. Thus the distance from York to Dover
over London Bridge was nearly 270 miles, and
there are several entries of eight days being
the allotted time, thus maintaining a rate of over
33 miles a day. In the case of eight days from
Northallerton to Dover, which means an addi-
tional 29 miles, and in one or two other cases
involving a still more rapid rate, it is scarcely pos-
sible to resist the idea that the coroner's scribe
has made a blunder.

There are some interesting abjuration entries
on a general Coroner's Roll for the county
of Norfolk, which covers the period of 35
to 45 Edward III. In three of these cases,
which occurred respectively in the churches of
Tattersett, Narford, and DidHngton, the coroner

LAWS AND CUSTOMS 29

assigned the port of Yarmouth to the fugitives.
In the first two instances three days were
allotted for the journey, a distance of about
45 miles. But to John Cone of Didlington,
who took refuge in the church of St. Peter of
Heckwold, for stealing seven lambs, value ids.,
the distance was fully 50 miles, and yet he was
only granted two days to reach Yarmouth. It
is to be supposed that the coroner noted that the
exile was in full vigour.

Three other Norfolk cases on this roll were
assigned to Sandwich, a Kent port, 1 3 miles north
of Dover. In two instances the delinquents had
fled to the churches of Mundford and Wretham
in the south of the county, and it was fairly
reasonable to allow eight days for the journey,
particularly the one from Mundford, whose age
is entered as thirty-two.^ But when one John
Kipernol fled to the church of Gayton, a few
miles north of Lynn, and on abjuration was
assigned to Sandwich, a distance of over 170
miles, and was ordered to accomplish it in four
days, it seems an impossible task, although he
was of the age of twenty years.

It appears to have been the custom for the
coroner to give explicit instructions to the ab-
juror as to the places where he was to halt for
the night, though such directions are very rarely
to be met with on the rolls. When John de
Bokenham fled to the church of Mildenhall, in

^ I have only met with some half-dozen cases in which the
dehnquent's age is registered.

30 SANCTUARIES

1362, to escape death for having stolen a horse
worth 20s., he abjured the realm, and the Suffolk
coroner assigned to him the port of Yarmouth,
which he was to reach within three days. The
first day he was to stop at Thetford, the second
at Norwich, and to reach Yarmouth on the third
day, a distance of upwards of 60 miles.

In the same church, and nearly at the same
date, another horse-stealer abjured the realm
before the same coroner. The official's action
in this second case makes it quite obvious that
the condition and age of the abjuror were taken
into account. The coroner assigned Yarmouth
as the port for John de Chelmsford, but he gave
him six days wherein to reach it. The first day
he was to reach Thetford, and there tarry for
a day; the third day he was to halt at Attle-
borough, the fourth at Norwich, the fifth at
Acle, and on the sixth to enter Yarmouth.
It will be noted that the first offender was
expected to walk the whole way from Thet-
ford to Norwich, a distance of 29 miles, in one
day, whilst the other man broke the journey
half-way ; and the like occurred in the stretch
of 21 miles between Norwich and Yarmouth.

Three years later a fugitive to the church
of Eriswell, to the north of Mildenhall, was
ordered to proceed to the port of Ipswich within
three days, breaking his journey at Bury St.
Edmunds and Stowmarket. This arrangement
involved a march of about 15 miles a day.

LAWS AND CUSTOMS 31

It is interesting to note the ingenuity of an
intelligent coroner in separating two or more
fellow-criminals who had gained refuge in the
same church, and who were probably reckoning
on tramping together to the same port and being
fellow-voyagers across the seas. A striking in-
stance of this occurred at the church of Ames-
bury, Wiltshire, in 1348. Three highwaymen
set upon two travelling hawkers on Amesbury
Hill, robbed them of their pack-horses and of
a considerable store of valuable cloth and velvet.
Afraid of detection, they fled to the church,
confessed, and abjured the realm, whereupon the
coroner despatched one to the port of Plymouth,
another to Portsmouth, and the third to Bristol.

Information is not forthcoming as to any
payment being made to the vessel on which
an abjuror embarked. Most probably the first
available ship was compelled to carry a passenger
of this description. It is also somewhat puzzling
to wonder what became of these abjurors when
they landed on foreign shores. In some cases
it is quite possible that their friends provided
them with a certain amount of funds before the
voyage began. Those on the coast across the
seas would also become tolerably familiar with
England's custom in this respect. Catholics
would be well aware that this^ was no mere
national custom, but that it had been recognised
by papal authority ; and as the insufficiently clad
fugitive, cross in hand, disembarked, he would

32 SANCTUARIES

be pretty sure of receiving, at all events for a
time, shelter and food at the hands of the clergy,
the religious, or the faithful laity. It is, how-
ever, highly probable that the exile would ere
long join the criminal classes in the new country.
Space is not available for even the briefest attempt
to deal with the sanctuary question in the dif-
ferent parts of continental Christendom.^

The abjuror of early days was expected to
discard all his clothes, which became the per-
quisite of a church official, and to wear a single
garment of sackcloth. The form of doing this
was maintained at Durham until its sanctuary
was abolished (chapter v.). We also find entries
enjoining the fugitive to go forth bareheaded
and barefooted. But during the fourteenth
century shirt and breeches are mentioned as
the dress in several instances. Several examples
of the beheading of an abjuror who had strayed
from the highway, by the populace or individuals,
will be found in the following pages. Under
chapter xiv. particulars are given of two Hunt-
ingdonshire cases of the thirteenth century, and
of two fourteenth century cases, the one in
Northamptonshire and the other in Lincoln-
shire.

There is no need for further recapitulation
with regard to details as to abjurors or the in-
cidents affecting other sanctuary seekers, such as
their escape after some days of security in order
to avoid abjuration, which will be found in the

^ See Henrick Brunner's Deutsche Rechtsgeschichte.

LAWS AND CUSTOMS 33

subsequent pages ; it is assumed that those who
are sufficiently interested in the subject to read
thus far will continue to the end of the work,
and special subjects will be found grouped to-
gether in the index.

The numberswho made use of sanctuary privi-
leges, whether transitory in the ordinary church,
or of long duration in the chartered sanctuaries,
will probably much surprise those to whom these
studies are a novelty. We are convinced that
Professor Trenholme's estimate that there were
usually a thousand persons in sanctuary during
any given year for several centuries of England's
history, is by no means an exaggerated estimate.

There is no occasion to offer any general
reflections on the life and customs and treatment
of the inmates of chartered sanctuaries, as the
important examples are all severally discussed in
subsequent chapters. It may, however, be re-
marked that though some of these chartered
sanctuaries fell into desuetude as years went on,
with the probable connivance of their ecclesiasti-
cal controllers, others, such as Westminster, St.
Martin's le Grand, and Beaulieu in the south, and
Durham and Beverley in the north, remained in
vigorous use up to their general suppression by
Henry VIII. The last of these was by far the
most remarkable in England ; its bounds were
the largest, and it offered certain facilities for the
absorption of the permanent sanctuary men in the
life of the town which were unknown elsewhere.

CHAPTER II

HISTORICAL INCIDENTS

The murder of St. Thomas of Canterbury — The forcible withdrawal
of Geoffrey, Archbishop of York, from sanctuary — Hubert Walter,
Archbishop of Canterbury, made Justiciar — The setting on fire
of St. Mary le Bow to drive William Fitz Osbert out of sanctuary
— Hubert de Burgh takes sanctuary in various places in 1232-3 —
Flagrant violations — The Westminster Abbey violation of 1378 —
Sanctuary under the Wars of the Roses — After the battle of
Tewkesbury — An Oxford University incident.

In this section it is proposed to draw brief atten-
tion to the prominent part played in English
history by the prevalent national custom of
sanctuary, which seems to have stamped itself
far more firmly for five centuries on the story of
our nation than was the case with any continental
country. Occasionally the whole course of events
was completely changed, and dynasties shaken by
violations of sanctuary.

The first great incident of this character after
the estabUshment of Norman rule, that of the
murder of St. Thomas of Canterbury, rang
throughout Christendom, and its effect in several
directions lasted during the whole of the medi-
aeval period. The fullest details are known as to
every circumstance relative to this stupendous
sacrilege, and the whole subject has produced so

The Site of the Martyrdom, Canterbury.

HISTORICAL INCIDENTS 35

many volumes, treatises, and descriptions that it
can be passed by in a short paragraph.^

At five o'clock, in the gloom of a winter's
evening, on Tuesday, 29th December 1 170, in
front of the altar of St. Benedict, within his own
cathedral church of Canterbury, the archbishop
was murdered by four fully armed knights, after
a fashion of mingled brutality and cowardice.
As he fell before the altar, under repeated sword
strokes, the faithful Edward Grim, himself
severely wounded, heard the martyr whisper,
" For the name of Jesus, and in defence of His
Church, I am ready to die." ^

The chronicler Henry Knighton, when laud-
ing Henry II. for his firm rule, asserts, though
doubtless with some exaggeration, that during
his reign neither robber nor ravisher, nor any on
guilty of homicide or any serious crime, was able
to enjoy the immunity of Holy Church ; and that
it was for resisting this royal action, among other
causes, that Thomas a Becket incurred the hatred
of the king and his eventual assassination.^

The next breach of sanctuary of national

^ Materials for the History of Thomas Becket (Rolls Series,
1875-85) run to seven volumes.

^ Illuminations of the murder of St. Thomas of Canterbury are
very frequent in ancient books, and it is not a little remarkable that
in the large majority the strange mistake is made of representing the
martyr as in the act of celebrating Mass, whereas he was in ordinary
dress and entered the cathedral as vespers were ending. The frontis-
piece of this volume, taken from an early thirteenth century Psalter, is
however, correct. It shows the archbishop in cassock and outer robe,
with his cap on the ground, kneeling in front of the four murderous
knights, with his cross-bearer in the background.

' Henrici Knighton Leycestrensis Chronicon, cap. xii.

36 SANCTUARIES

moment concerns another prelate of archiepisco-
pal rank, namely, Geoffrey, Archbishop of York.
Had not this incident occurred, it is highly im-
probable that John would ever have ascended the
throne. The ancient priory church of Dover
is sometimes cited as possessed of chartered sanc-
tuary rights, but of this we have not been able
to find any confirmation. But the ordinary sanc-
tuary rights pertaining to consecrated buildings
were deliberately violated in the case of this
church towards the close of the twelfth century,
after a fashion that caused a national upheaval.
Geoffrey, the natural son of Henry II., was
elected Archbishop of York in 1191, shortly
before his half brother Richard's departure for
the Holy Land. Geoffrey refused to be conse-
crated by the Archbishop of Canterbury, and in
other ways annoyed the king. Richard is said
to have wrung from his brother a promise that
he would remain in Normandy until after his
return from the Crusades, and that he would
meanwhile abstain from seeking confirmation of
hiselectionat the hands of the Pope. Meanwhile,
however, Geoffrey was consecrated at St. Martin's,
Tours, by the archbishop and seven of his suffra-
gans, and also obtained papalconfirmation. With-
out conveying any information of his intention
to William Longchamp, Bishop of Ely, Richard's
regent and chancellor, Geoffrey set sail for Dover
to enter into possession of his dignity. He was
forbidden by the chancellor to land, and on his

HISTORICAL INCIDENTS 37

persisting, a strict watch was set upon the vessel.
But Geoffrey changing his clothes, managed to
escape in disguise, and mounting a swift horse,
gained the refuge of the conventual church. It
was six o'clock on the morning of September
14th, and the monks were at Mass. The epistoler
was just reading the words—" He that troubleth
you shall bear his judgment, whosoever he be.
... I would they were even cut off which
trouble you" (Gal. v. 10, 12) — when, to their
amazement, the Archbishop of York hurriedly
entered the quire, claiming immunity from arrest
in that sacred place. The accounts of different
chroniclers are somewhat conflicting as to the
exact time when Longchamp's servants violated
sanctuary, but it was apparently at the close of
the Mass which this entry had interrupted, and
after Geoffrey had had time to array himself in
pontifical vestments. Bursting into the church
with violence, they dragged the archbishop from
the very altar, and hurried him through the
narrow dirty streets up to the castle, disregarding
the cries of the populace — " What evil hath he
done ? Is he not an archbishop, and son of a
king and the brother of a king." On reaching
the castle they handed over Geoffrey to Matthew
de Clere, the constable of Dover Castle, who
had married Longchamp's sister. Prince John
at once took open action against Longchamp,
and, finding himself supported by the rest of the
bishops as well as by the barons, declared that if

38 SANCTUARIES

Geoffrey was not immediately released he would
march on Dover and set him free by force. To
this storm the imperious Longchamp, though
papal legate, was obliged to bow, and his speedy
downfall and exile were the result of this head-
strong invasion of sanctuary rights. Eight days
after his capture. Archbishop Geoffrey was led
back to St. Martin's Priory, whence he shortly
left for London, and was received in St. Paul's,
on 2nd December, by the Bishop of London.^

The third striking incident relative to sanc-
tuaries is yet again concerned with an archbishop,
but is of a totally different character, for it ex-
hibits a prelate playing the part of a determined
statesman rather than an ecclesiastic. It shows to
what extremes the State was occasionally willing
to go, in defiance of all usual sanctuary custom,
in order to secure the capture of an important
criminal. Hubert Walter, who held the arch-
bishopric of Canterbury from 1193 to 1205, was
a distinguished statesman and lawyer, but gave
great offence to the religious world by holding
office under the Crown, in direct contravention
of the principle for which Becket had died. As
justiciar he was constantly involved in a multi-
plicity of secular business. In 1196, Walter, as
justiciar, demanded of the city of London a cer-
tain sum of money towards the expenses of the
war in France. It was to be raised by poll-tax, a

^ See the chronicles of Hoveden, Brompton, Gen'ase of Dover,
and Diceto.

HISTORICAL INCIDENTS 39

monstrously unfair mode of assessment, whereby,
as levied on persons not property, the wealthy
escaped their fair proportion. The burgesses of
the corporation opposed this, whilst the aldermen
were in its favour. The former unfortunately
damaged their cause by accepting the leader-
ship of a violent and profligate man, one William
Fitz Osbert, usually known as Longbeard. By his
influence the common people, in vast numbers,^
arrayed themselves as his supporters against the
aldermen and magistrates. The city seemed on
the brink of a great insurrection, but the justiciar
caused the military to be summoned from the
adjacent counties, made a specious address to the
citizens, and at last felt himself strong enough to
attempt the arrest of Longbeard. The insurgent
leader was overwhelmed by a strong force, and
took refuge for sanctuary in the church of St.
Mary le Bow, with his mistress and children.
This retreat was apparently wisely chosen, for it
was a peculiar of the Archbishop of Canterbury,
and Fitz Osbert naturally supposed that such a
church would be specially respected by the
primate. But he mistook his man. In Hubert
Walter the statesman in such a crisis outweighed
the ecclesiastic. The archbishop dreaded a delay
which might arouse the fickle populace to resist
the invasion of sanctuary immunity ; he sum-
moned Longbeard to surrender, but his reply was
to fortify himself in the church, and the order

' According to William of Newburgh, 52,000.

40 SANCTUARIES

was instantly given to set fire to the building to
compel him to come forth. The fire and smoke
soon drove him out ; for a time Longbeard
gallantly fought, but, receiving a wound in the
belly, he was overpowered, manacled, and taken
to the Tower. Thence after a trial he was con-
demned to death, stripped naked, tied to a horse's
tail, and dragged to Tyburn, there to lose the
remnants of his life by hanging. The populace
regarded him as a saint, and various miracles
were said to have been wrought beneath the
gibbet where his carcase hung in chains.^

This startling violation of the immunity of the
Church by the first ecclesiastic of the kingdom
aroused violent indignation in the religious world,
and the archbishop would probably have had at
once to bow to the storm, had not the moneyed
classes of the city rallied to his support, for they
believed that his energetic action had saved them
from pillage. Eventually, in 1 198, he was driven
from the justiciarship, and one of the chief
articles of complaint to the Pope alleged against
him by the canons was this case of sanctuary
violation.

In 1232, Hubert de Burgh, Earl of Kent,
and chief justiciar of England, who had been so
faithful a guardian of the king's interests during
his minority, fell into disrepute with his royal

^ Dean Hook, in his Lives of the Archbishops^ vol. ii. ch. ii, has
given a good harmony of the somewhat conflicting accounts of New-
burgh, Gervase, Wendover, Matt. Paris, and Hoveden.

HISTORICAL INCIDENTS 41

master, chiefly because he had opposed and
frustrated an unwise war with France. Hubert,
dreading the king's vengeance, took sanctuary
within the Surrey priory of Merton. The most
preposterous charges were made against him,
including one of sorcery and enchantments by
which he was said to have drawn the king's
favour to himself above all others. When Henry
heard of Hubert's place of refuge, he ordered the
Mayor of London, with a great array of citizens,
to drag the Earl out of his sanctuary and to
bring him before the council dead or alive.
They set forth, to the number of 20,000, with
this intention, but wiser advice prevailed, and
at the eleventh hour they were diverted from
their intention. Through the intercession of
Hubert's staunchest friend, the Archbishop of
Dublin, the king was moved to grant him an
assurance of protection until the following
Twelfth-tide (it was then September), when he
was to appear before the council. Hubert,
believing himself secure for the present, left the
shelter of the Austin priory of Merton, and
set forth to join his wife, who was herself in
sanctuary at Bury St. Edmunds. Meanwhile,
however, his enemies again prevailed with the
fickle Henry, and Sir Godfrey de Crancumbe,
with three hundred men, was sent to apprehend
the Earl whilst on his way through Essex.
Having intelligence of their approach by night,
Hubert hastily fled into a chapel at Brentwood

42 SANCTUARIES

adjoining the house where he was then lodging,
claiming sanctuary. From thence the soldiers
roughly dragged him forth, although he was
holding in one hand a crucifix, and in the other
the pyx with the reserved Sacrament. A smith
was sent for to make shackles of iron, but when
he understood that they were for the aged jus-
ticiar, he refused to exercise his trade. There-
upon they otherwise bound their prisoner, placed
him upon horseback, and conveyed him to the
Tower.

This outrageous breach of sanctuary aroused
the indignation of Roger Niger, the Bishop of
London, whose diocese extended over Essex.
He assured the king that if the Earl was not at
once restored to the chapel from whence he had
been dragged, he would excommunicate all the
authors of the outrage. The king was obliged
to give way, and Hubert was restored to the
chapel ; but the sheriffs of both Essex and Hert-
fordshire received the royal command to guard
the chapel with the greatest strictness, so that
the prisoner might neither escape nor receive
victuals from any one. A trench was dug around
the chapel to prevent all access. It would have
been possible for the Earl to follow the cus-
tomary course and summon the coroner ; but
in order to obtain release in that way, he would
have had to confess to the truth of the various
monstrous charges against him, which actually
included that of poisoning the two Earls of

HISTORICAL INCIDENTS 43

Salisbury and Pembroke, and would then have had
to abjure the realm. Such action was of course
impossible, and Hubert was obliged to come forth
and surrender himself. Whereupon he was again
taken back to the Tower. The king now relented
somewhat towards his aged adviser, and again
made promise that he would not take his life.
Certain of his possessions were restored to him,
and he was committed to the castle of Devizes,
there to abide " in free prison " with the Earls
of Cornwall, Warren, Marshall, and Ferrars as
his sureties.

About Michaelmas 1233, news reached
Hubert that the Bishop of Winchester was
scheming his death. Thereupon he escaped out
of the castle of Devizes, and fled once more to
sanctuary in the adjacent church of St. John.
Here, however, his pursuers found him before
the altar, with the altar crucifix in his hands.
Regardless of the sanctity of the place, he was
seized, and brought back to the castle. The
Bishop of Salisbury, in whose diocese this last
outrage against Church privileges occurred, at
once repaired to the castle, and endeavoured to
secure the return to the parish church of the
distinguished prisoner. On his solicitations
proving ineffectual, the bishop excommunicated
the whole garrison, and made formal complaint
to the king. In this complaint the Bishop of
London and other prelates joined. Again the
king gave way, and the prisoner was restored

44 SANCTUARIES

to sanctuary. The same policy, however, was
adopted as at Brentwood, and the sheriff of
Wiltshire was ordered to prevent any one bring-
ing him victuals. On this occasion the action
of the sheriff was in vain, for Richard Earl
Marshall, who was then in rebellion against the
king's evil advisers, rescued, with the aid of a
troop of armed men, the ex-justiciar from his
sanctuary, and carried him off to the castle at
Chepstow.^ The subsequent life of the aged
statesman need not be here pursued.

Early in the reign of Richard II. — namely,
in 1378 — a monstrous case of violation of sanc-
tuary occurred in Westminster Abbey, when
an esquire named Robert Hawley, a sanctuary
fugitive, was slain in front of the prior's stall
at the very time of High Mass. All England
rang with the outrage, and the consequences
would have been still more serious, had not John
of Gaunt been at the back of the sanctuary
violators. The whole circumstances are set
forth in the section on Westminster Sanctuary.

In 1404 grave complaints were alleged in
Parliament against the perpetual sanctuary
afforded by the collegiate church of St. Martin's
le Grand, London ; but this, with many other
particulars, is set forth in another chapter dealing
with that chartered sanctuary.

It has, too, been thought best to treat of

' Matt. Paris, Chronica Majoi-a (Rolls Series), vol. iii. passim, is the
chief authority for these incidents.

HISTORICAL INCIDENTS 45

the constant and highly important use made
of sanctuary by royal and other distinguished
persons during the reigns of Henry VI. and
Edward IV., owing to the fluctuating successes
or reverses of the Wars of the Roses, under
the respective sanctuaries of Westminster and
Beaulieu. Under the latter, too, of these, an
account is given of the several sanctuary seek-
ings of that strange pretender Perkin Warbeck,
between 1495 and 1499.

The Wars of the Roses, however, brought
about considerable use of the temporary sanctuary
afforded by churches up and down the country,
apart from the prolonged shelter gained by
entering such liberties as those of Westminster,
St. Martin's, or Beaulieu. A notorious and
shocking example of the violation of sanctuary
after the fury of battle occurred in May 1471,
after the strife of Tewkesbury, when Edward IV.
treated the claimed immunity of the abbey
church as vain.

" It is probable," says Lingard, " that many
of the Lancastrian leaders might have escaped
by flight, if they had not sought an asylum
within the church. While they were trium-
phant, they had always respected the right of
sanctuary, and a hope was cherished that grati-
tude for the preservation of his wife, his chil-
dren, and two thousand of his partisans, would
restrain Edward from violating a privilege, to
which he was so much indebted. But the

46 SANCTUARIES

murder of the young prince had whetted his
appetite for blood. With his sword drawn he
attempted to enter the church : but a priest,
bearing the host in his hand, ran to the door,
and refused to move from the threshold till the
king had given a reluctant promise to spare
the lives of all who had taken refuge within
the walls. For two days the promise was
observed : on the third a body of armed men
burst into the church, seized the duke of
Somerset, with the lord of St. John's, six knights,
and seven esquires, and dragging their victims
to a scaffold, struck off their heads." ^

Though not of primary importance, it may,
we think, be permissible to give here an account
of an Oxford incident of the fifteenth century
which is somewhat difficult to classify. The
acts of the Chancellor's Court, Oxford, give
particulars of a remarkable dispute as to sanc-
tuary that occurred in 1463. John Harry, a
tailor, having wounded another man with a
knife, fled for sanctuary to Broadgates Hall
{in aulum Latce portce) ; this Hall belonged to
the hospital or house of St. John Baptist with-
out the east gate of Oxford, which had been
often recognised as a place of immunity for
fugitives. Master Walter Hill, a University
proctor, ignorant of the rights of sanctuary
granted to this Hall in old days by Roman
pontiffs, dragged forth John Harry in spite of

' Lingard's History of England, iii. 541-2.

HISTORICAL INCIDENTS 47

his protestations and placed him in puMic
custody, under a promise, however, to restore
him to sanctuary in case his life should be in
danger. Subsequently it was proved before the
commissary of the University that the wound
was not serious, and one Thomas Taylour was
accepted as surety for the payment of a fine of
IDS. by the accused ; but in the end John
Harry, pleading that he was still in Jeopardy
of his life, was restored by the proctor to sanc-
tuary within the Hall from which he had been
so rashly thrust forth ; for the proctor became
fully satisfied as to the privileges belonging to
the hospital of St. John which extended to all
the buildings within its precincts/

'■ Anstey's Munimenta Academica, pt. ii. pp. 702-4.

CHAPTER III

THE SANCTUARY OF WESTMINSTER

No special sanctuary building — Stow's Survey — The murder of
Hawley in the quire, 1378 — The abbot defies Parliament in
1388 — The case of Sir Robert Tresilian — Confession of John
Paule, an abbey servant— John Russell, slanderer, voluntarily
leaves sanctuary — The Duchess of Gloucester disbarred from
sanctuary — Sanctuary violated in 1454 in the person of the Duke
of Exeter — A companion of Jack Cade at Westminster —
Edward IV.'s Queen in sanctuary, 1470 — Birth of Edward V. —
The coup iftf/al of 1483 — The widowed Queen again in sanctuary
— The boy Edward V. leaves sanctuary and is murdered — The
oath of a Westminster fugitive — Historical MSS. Commission —
Skelton, the poet laureate — Sanctuary rights destroyed by
Henry VIII., but re-established under Mary — Abbot Fecken-
ham's procession — Acts of Privy Council tem_p. Mary — Sanctuary
again abolished by Elizabeth.

The chartered right of sanctuary, a matter quite
distinct from that degree of sanctuary which
belonged to every consecrated church and church-
yard, was shared by the great abbey of St. Peter
of Westminster, as Dean Stanley says, with
" at least thirty and three great English monas-
teries, but probably in none did the building
occupy so prominent a position, and in none did
it play so important a part."^ The number of
great monasteries, however, which exercised
special sanctuary rights (apart from Cistercian

^ Historical Memorials of Westminster Abbey, by Dean Stanley,
5th edit., p. 346. The Dean treats of this sanctuary at some length,

pp. 346-53, but not a little of what he states is inaccurate.

48

SANCTUARY OF WESTMINSTER 49

houses) was by no means as great as the dean
supposed, nor is he correct in supposing that
there was at Westminster any particular ancient
building, either of small or great extent, to which
the term sanctuary specially applied.

As to the " rude vast pile of masonry,"
" almost Cyclopean in structure," supposed to
consist of one church on the top of another, of
Norman date, all specially assigned for sanctuary
purposes, upon which Dean Stanley, Prebendary
Walcott, and a cloud of imitative minor writers
discourse, it is not pleasant to feel obliged to
write that it is all so much moonshine. It is
necessary to be explicit on this matter, for Sir
Walter Besant also lent his considerable name
during recent years to try and perpetuate this
foolish blunder. All this originated in the day
dreams of that imaginative antiquary, Dr.
Stukeley, who was the first constructor of this
mare's nest in a paper read before the Society of
Antiquaries on 30th October, 1755, and which
appeared in the first volume of the Archceologia.
Dr. Stukeley, in 1750, very roughly surveyed a
great belfry of stone and timber covered with lead,
erected by Edward III. about i 347, which was
then being pulled down. The " two churches "
were but two stages of this large bell-tower ; the
whole building was even then called the belfry ;
and the learned doctor seems to have invented the
name sanctuary for it entirely out of his own
imaginings. The absurdity of this idea was

D

50 SANCTUARIES

shown up in Notes afjd Queries in 1895, but is
still from time to time reiterated.^ The fact is
that at Westminster, as in other specially privi-
leged houses, the whole precincts possessed the
powers of immunity.

There are many fanciful surmises as to the
early date of the sanctuary rights of Westminster,
and of the mysterious visions associated with its
origin, but it will here suffice to follow the
chronicle of Stow in his Survey of London, who
states that the privilege was " first granted by
Sebert, King of the East Saxons, since increased
by Edgar, King of the West Saxons, renewed
and confirmed by King Edward the Confessor,
as appeareth by this his charter following :
" Edward by the grace of God, King of English-
men ! I make it to be known to all generations
of the world after me, that by speciall com-
mandment of our holy father Pope Leo, I have
renewed and honoured the holy church of the
blessed Apostle St. Peter of Westminster, and
I order and establish for ever, that what person
of what condition or estate soever hee be, from
whence soever he come, or for what offence or
cause it be, either for his refuge in to the said
holy place, he be assured of his life, liberty, and
lims," &c. Stow expressly states that this privi-
lege belonged to " the church, churchyard, and
close," and not to any particular building.^

1 Notes and Queries, Ser. VII., vol. viii. pp. 181-2.
^ Stow's Survey of London, Clarendon Press Ed., 1908, vol. ii. pp.
1 1 1-12. This 1066 charter of the Confessor is supposed to be spurious.

The Quire, Westminster Abbey.

SANCTUARY OF WESTMINSTER 51

The first occasion when the attention of the
nation at large was called to the question of
sanctuary at Westminster occurred in the days of
Richard II. Two knights of the Black Prince,
Robert Hawley and John Shackel, who served
with him in his campaign in the north of Spain
in 1367, took prisoner a certain Count Denia at
the battle of Najara. To raise money for his
ransom, he was allowed to return home, leaving
his son as hostage in his place. But the ransom
never came, and the young count remained a
prisoner. Some years later — namely, in 1378 —
John of Gaunt, who claimed in right of his wife
to be King of Castile, demanded the young man's
release, and when Hawley and Shackel refused to
release him without ransom, they were committed
to the Tower. They, however, contrived to
escape, and took sanctuary at Westminster. There
they were pursued by Sir Alan BoxhuU, Constable
of the Tower, and by Sir Ralph Ferrers with
fifty armed men. They forced admission, pur-
sued the two knights, who for greater safety
had fled into the very quire of the church. It
was the festival of St. Taurinus, on the nth of
August, and the time of high mass. The gos-
peller had just uttered the words, " If the good-
man of the house had known what time the thief
would appear," when with a clash of arms the
sacrilegious pursuers burst in upon the worship-
pers. Shackel managed to escape ; but Hawley
in trying to evade his murderers ran twice round

52 SANCTUARIES

the quire, receiving divers sword thrusts as he
fled. At last, pierced w^ith twelve wounds, he fell
dead before the prior's stall on the north side of
the entrance to the quire. With him fell his
servant and one of the monks. Hawley was
regarded as a martyr, and obtained the honour of
burial in the south transept. " A brass effigy and
a long epitaph," says Dean Stanley, " marked till
within the last century the stone where he lay,
and another inscription was engraved on the
stone where he fell, and on which his effigy may
still be traced." ^ This murder in such a place,
apart even from the peculiar sanctuary privilege,
aroused the deepest feeling of dismay. For four
months the abbey remained closed to all religious
rites, and even the sittings of Parliament were
suspended lest they should be contaminated by
assembling near the scene ot the outrage. Box-
hull and Ferrers were solemnly excommunicated,
and only eventually obtained absolution on pay-
ment of the then very heavy fine of ^^Taoo. If
it had not been for the influence of John of
Gaunt, their lives would probably have been

' The spot where Hawley fell was long pointed out by the follow-
ing lines incised in the pavement : —

M. Domini C. ter, septuaginta, his dabis Octo

Taurini celebrem plebe colente diem.
Hie duodena prius in corpore vulnera gestans,

Ense petente caput Haule Robertus obit
Cujus in interitu libertas, cultus, honestas,

Planxit militiae immunis Ecclesiae.

See Neale and Brayley's Westminster Abbey (1818), i. 81-3 ;
ii. 269.

SANCTUARY OF WESTMINSTER 53

forfeited. Meanwhile Shackley gave up his
prisoner, but obtained the ransom of 500 marks,
and another 100 marks a year for Hfe.

The whole question arising from this murder
in the quire of the abbey was brought before Par-
liament by the Archbishop of Canterbury and
argued at length, with the result that formal con-
firmation of the sanctuary rights of Westminster,
" as granted by the noble Kings Edgar, St. Ed-
ward, and other kings their successors," was
registered.^

In the following year it was enacted that the
goods of debtors taking refuge here were to be
seized to defray all just claims.

A singular case, presenting some unusual
points, occurred in 1388, as recorded in the
chronicle of John Malverne.^ A clerk, who was
involved in a strife with the holder of a benefice
on account of papal provision, took sanctuary at
Westminster. He had petitioned the king's
chancellor, the Bishop of Ely, in vain, and at last
devised a plan to get his cause known at Rome.
He wrote a long letter complaining bitterly of
the chancellor, and committed it to a companion
of his who was going to Rome as a brief-bearer.
But the messenger, having business with the
chancellor, showed him the letter. Whereupon
his proceedings were brought before parliament.

' Pleas of Parliament, iii. 37, 50-1.

^ See the continuation of Lumby's Polychronicon Ranulphi Higden,
vol. ix. (Chronicles and Memorials).

54 SANCTUARIES

and the clerk was charged with revealing the
secrets of the kingdom and making false charges
against the king's officials. It was asserted that
sanctuary could not be afforded to one playing a
treacherous part against his country, and the
abbot of Westminster was summoned before par-
liament to justify his retention of the fugitive.
The abbot failed to appease their anger, and on
refusing to deliver the clerk into their hands, was
pledged to keep the offender under special guard
for four days until their further will should be
made known. The clerk, hearing of their threats,
placed himself close to the shrine of the Con-
fessor, imploring that saint's aid and protection.
On 31st May the commons and lords of parlia-
ment demanded the release to them of the fugitive
out of sanctuary, for they considered it absurd
that he should escape punishment for such a
national offence as revealing the kingdom's secrets
to outsiders, and that sanctuary was never intended
to cover action of this description. The king,
however, came to a contrary opinion, and was
convinced that the privilege of sanctuary ought
to be respected, but he promised to confer with
the abbot. Parliament was not, however, yet
appeased, and on ist June clamour was again raised
for the clerk's surrender ; among those who used
the strongest language in this matter was Ralph
Lord Basset. Eventually, however, the clerk was
left in the abbot's custody until the next parlia-
ment.

SANCTUARY OF WESTMINSTER 55

The excitement of the parliament over the
case of this nameless and apparently unimportant
clerk was doubtless in the main owing to the
semi-legal violation of Westminster sanctuary in
the celebrated Tresilian case which had imme-
diately preceded it. Sir Robert Tresilian was
appointed chief justice of the King's Bench in
I 38 1, and took a prominent part in securing the
conviction and execution of those engaged in the
peasants' revolt. In the affairs of 1387 the chief
justice took strong action on the side of the
court party. In November of that year Tresilian
and others were accused of treason, and the king
was forced to summon parliament to meet in
February, 1388, to deal with the charge. Tre-
silian took to flight, and he was condemned in
default. The accounts of Froissart and Knighton
as to his discovery are somewhat conflicting, but
there appears no reason to doubt that the record
by Malverne is correct. It is definitely stated by
that chronicler that Sir Robert Tresilian was
found to be in sanctuary at Westminster on 19th
February ; that the abbey was attacked by a
great mob ; that the Duke of Gloucester pre-
vented his being put to an immediate and cruel
death, but that he ordered his arrest and caused
him to be dragged forth out of sanctuary. He
in vain pleaded the immunities of St. Peter of
Westminster ; he was brought before parliament
the same morning, when he declared the process
against him was invalid. Sentence was ordered

56 SANCTUARIES

to be executed ; he was removed for a short time
to the Tower, but in the afternoon of the same
day he was dragged through the city and hung
on the gallows of Tyburn.

On 1 8th April the king held an examination
at Kensington of the charters and privileges of
Westminster Abbey, in the presence of his new
chancellor, the Bishop of Winchester. The chan-
cellor held that under special circumstances a
fugitive might be taken out of chartered sanctuary,
arguing that otherwise the greatest wrongdoers
might escape punishment. The king, however,
refused to accept the chancellor's ruling, and
stated plainly to the council that those who
took Tresilian out of Westminster were guilty of
sacrilege. Malverne further records, in connec-
tion with this case, that about the middle of May,
1392, a certain servant of the church of West-
minster, by name John Paule, was indicted and
convicted of murder. On being sentenced to be
hung on 24th May, Paule made full confession of
that murder, and of other matters that were on
his conscience, bewailing his past life. He con-
fessed to having persuaded fugitives to depart out
of Westminster sanctuary who were afterwards
caught and hung ; he had done the like to others
who were afterwards caught and condemned to
life imprisonment ; and more especially had he
wickedly betrayed to certain of the parliament
the fact that Tresilian was in secret disguise in
that sanctuary. The chronicler calls attention

SANCTUARY OF WESTMINSTER S7

to this case as a token of God's revenge against
sacrilegious offenders.

An interesting case occurred in 141 5, which
shows incidentally that the names of those in
sanctuary at Westminster were not usually re-
vealed. John Russell, a wool-packer of the city,
circulated a malicious slander against Thomas
Fauconer, ex-mayor, alderman, and mercer, in
the parish of St. Mary le Bow, during the month
of July, to the effect that one Richard Surmyn,
who had been declared a heretic and burnt at
Smithfield, held letters patent of pardon from the
king, but that they were destroyed by Fauconer
in contempt of the king. Thereupon, by the
order of the king and his council, Fauconer was
imprisoned in the Tower, and not released until
he had paid jTiooo for his alleged trespass and
contempt. The ex-mayor on his release took
action against Russell for this slander, and Russell
was brought before the court of the mayor and
aldermen. The latter, however, pleaded for ad-
journment as he was unprovided with counsel,
and he was released on bail until 30th July, twelve
citizens of London coming forward to be his
sureties under pain of ^Tioo. But on the day
appointed, Russell being called, made default ; the
inquiry proceeded in his absence, and the jury
pronounced him guilty of malicious slander. He
was condemned to stand for an hour in the city
pillory on three several market days, with a whet-
stone, in token of his being a har, hung from his

58 SANCTUARIES

neck. The sureties were arrested and put in
prison until they should pay the sum of _^ioo to
the city chamberlain. On the same day they
found the sum in money and goods and were re-
leased, imploring the mayor and aldermen for
mercy as they were all poor men. Whereupon
they were ordered diligently to endeavour to find
and arrest the defaulter ; but in spite of many
searches, and incurring much expense, they failed
to discover his whereabouts. Meanwhile John
Russell had betaken himself to sanctuary at St.
Peter's, Westminster, and stayed there for three-
quarters of a year without once coming out. But
at last overcome by sorrow and contrition, both
for his own misdeed and for the impoverishment
brought upon his friends, Russell voluntarily left
the Westminster sanctuary, and on 26th April,
1 41 6, came before the mayor and aldermen in
full court, and presented an ample and humble
confession of his baseless slanders written in Eng-
lish in his own hand.^ The records go no further,
but it may be safely concluded that the pillory
sentence was carried out.

The Duchess of Gloucester, Dame Eleanor
Cobham, fled here for sanctuary in 1441. Roger
Bolingbroke, this wretched woman's accomplice,
assisted her to model a wax doll like Henry VI.,
which was exposed to a slow fire, in the belief
that as the wax melted so would the king's
health fade away. Bolingbroke and another

^ Riley's Memorials of London, 630-4.

SANCTUARY OF WESTMINSTER 59

accomplice were arrested, and the former ab-
jured his black art at St. Paul's Cross, on Sunday,
23rd July, and was eventually executed for high
treason. The duchess, alarmed, fled to West-
minster on the following Tuesday, but her claim
to sanctuary was refused, as those guilty of heresy,
necromancy, or witchcraft were always excluded
from this immunity. The two archbishops held
a court in St. Stephen's to investigate the charges,
when her disbarment from sanctuary was con-
firmed, and after severe penance she was im-
prisoned for life.

In 1454, the Duke of York (the Protector),
the Earl of Warwick, and others excited the
wrath of many, and the indignation of the abbot
and his monks, by violating the sanctuary of
Westminster by taking thence John Holland,
Duke of Exeter, a fugitive, and conveying him
to imprisonment to the castle of Pontefract.
The excuse made was that Holland ought never
to have been admitted to sanctuary as he was
a traitor.

In the same year the case of" Robert Ponyngys,
late of Suthwerk, in our Counte of Surr^, Es-
quyer," was brought before Parliament in con-
sequence of his stirring up riots in Kent. He
is described as having been " Karver and Sword
Berer to the most heynous Traytour John Cade."
He had made submission and been pardoned for
his participation in that rebellion, but he had sub-
sequently taken part in many riots and offences.

6o SANCTUARIES

and had taken " santyarye and liberti of the
Chirche of Westm'' for tuition." ^

At no time in its history did the sanctuary of
Westminster play so important a part in leading
national events as in the distressful days associated
with the rule of Edward IV. and the fall of the
house of York. When this king was driven
abroad in the autumn of 1470 by the rising of
the Nevilles to replace Henry VI. on the throne,
Edward's queen, Elizabeth Woodville, stole
secretly out of the Tower on ist October and
gained sanctuary at Westminster. " There like
a woman forsaken," as Speed says, " shee solitarily
remained, and on the fourth of November fol-
lowing was delivered of a Sonne, which with-
out all pompe, more like a private mans Childe
than a Prince, was there also baptized by the
name of Edward, who after his father's death
a while was King of England, as shall be said ;
other Sanctuaries were full of King Edward's
friends, that prayed devoutly for his prosperous
health and well hoped the world would againe
turne, as slowly it did." Elizabeth was not,
however, quite so solitary as Speed represents.
We know from other authorities that she was
accompanied on this occasion to sanctuary by her
three young daughters, by her mother Jacqueline,
and by Lady Scrope ; the abbot supplied them
with provisions, " half a loaf and two muttons "
daily. The infant prince was baptized by the

' Pleas of Parliament, v. 247-8.

SANCTUARY OF WESTMINSTER 6i

sub-prior, with the abbot and the Duke of Bed-
ford as his godfathers, and Lady Scrope as his
godmother.

In April, 1472, Edward VI. again got the
upper hand and returned to England. One of
his first acts was to visit Westminster and rescue
his queen, with the infant prince, from her
six months' confinement in sanctuary. Abbot
Milling was rewarded for his courtesy by being
promoted to the see of Hereford.

Eleven years later Elizabeth Woodville paid
a much more distressful visit to this house of
refuge for troubled royalties. In June, 1483, the
false-tongued Richard, Duke of Gloucester, came
to London with his sanctuary-born nephew, the
boy-king Edward V., nominally to prepare for
his coronation. But Edward V. was lodged in
the Tower, and the queen recognising the malig-
nant treachery of the Duke, fled again to her
refuge of Westminster, taking with her her five
daughters, and her second son Richard, Duke of
York, a boy of nine years. Richard's schemes
to outwit his rivals in this, the most scandalous
of all English coup d'dtats, were so well laid,
that had it not been for a door of communication
leading direct from the palace into the abbey,
the queen and her children would never have
gained the sanctuary ; the closest watch and
ward was set on the roads leading to Westminster
to prevent any supporters of Edward V. from
reaching the refuge, whilst the Thames was

62 SANCTUARIES

alive with boats manned by the Duke's adherents
for a Hke purpose.

The discussions which arose at this time as
to sanctuary are of considerable interest, and the
details are set forth so fully in the History of the
Reigns of Edward V. and Richard III., and by
other chroniclers, that it is not necessary to
apologise for treating this episode at some length.
The extracts are taken verbatim from Speed's
Historie of Great Britai?7e. News of this sudden
action came to the Archbishop of York, then
Chancellor of England, during the night, causing
him much alarm.

" And thereupon by and by after the mes-
sengers departure, hee caused in all hast all his
seruants to be called vp, and so with his owne
household about him, euery man weaponed, hee
tooke the Great Scale with him, and came yet
before day vnto the Queene. About whom hee
found much heauinesse, rumble, haste and busi-
nesse, carriage and conueiance of her stuffe into
Sanctuary, chests, coffers, packes and fardels,
trussed all on mens backes, no man vnoccupied,
some lading, some going, some discharging, some
comming for more, some breaking downe the
wals to bring in the next way, and some drew
to them to helpe to carry a wrong way. The
Queene her selfe sate alone on the rushes, all
desolate and dismayed, whom the Archbishop
comforted in the best manner hee could, shewing
her that hee trusted the matter was nothing so

SANCTUARY OF WESTMINSTER 63

sore as shee tooke it for, and that he was put in
good hope and out of feare, by a message sent
him from the Lord Chamberlaine : Ah woe
worth him (quoth the Queene) hee is one of
them that laboureth to destroy me and my
bloud.

" Madam (quoth hee) be of good cheare :
for I assure you, if they crowne any other King
then your sonne, whom they haue now with
them, wee shall on the morrow crowne his
brother, whom you haue here with you : and
here is the Great Seale, which in like sort as
that noble Prince, your Husband deliured it
vnto mee, so here I deliuer it vnto you, to the
vse and behoofe of your sonne, and therewith hee
betooke her the Great Seale, and departed home
againe, euen in the dawning of the day: by which
time hee might in his Chamber window see all
the Thames full of boats of the Dukes of
Glocester's seruants, watching that no man should
goe to Sanctuary, nor none should passe vn-
searched."

After recording the false obsequiousness of
Richard to the young king at a council where
he got himself proclaimed Protector, Speed pro-
ceeds : —

" Now although that the Protector so sore
thirsted for the finishing of those designes which
he had begun, and thought every day a yeare
till they were atchieued, yet durst he no further
attempt, so long as hee had but halfe his prey in

64 SANCTUARIES

his hand : well witting, that if hee deposed the
one Brother, all the Realme should fall to the
other, if he either remained in Sanctuary, or
should be conueyed to his further liberty : where-
fore, incontinent at the next meeting of the Lords
in Councell, he proposed vnto them that it was
a hainous deed of the Queene, and proceeded of
great malice towards the Kings Counsellers, that
she should keepe in Sanctuary the Kings Brother
from him, whose speciall pleasure and comfort
were to haue his Brother with him : and that
by her done, was to none other intent but to
bring all the Lords in obloquie, and murmure
of the people, as though they were not to be
trusted with the Kings Brother, who by assent
of the Nobles of the land, were appointed as the
Kings neerest friends, to the tuition of his owne
royall person."

These points the Protector proceeded to
elaborate at length, outwitting the council by
his exuberant professions of goodwill and affec-
tion for " the yong Duke himselfe, the Kinges
most honourable brother,and, after my Soveraigne
himselfe, my most dear nephew."

" When the Protector had said, all the Coun-
cell affirmed, that the motion was good and
reasonable, and to the King and the Duke his
Brother honourable, and the thing that should
cease great murmure in the Realme, if the
mother might be by good meanes induced to
deliuer him. Which thing the Archbishop of

SANCTUARY OF WESTMINSTER 65

Yorke, whom they all agreed also to be thereto
most conuenient, tooke vpon him to moue her,
and therein to doe his vttermost endeauour :
howbeit, if she could by no meanes be entreated
with her good will to deliuer him, then thoughte
he, and such other of the Clergie then present,
that it were not in any wise to be attempted, to
take him out against her will. For it would be
a thing that should turne to the great grudge
of all men, and high displeasure of God, if the
priuiledge of that holy place should now bee
broken, which had so many yeares beene kept,
which both Kings and Popes so good had
granted, so many had confirmed, and which
holy ground was more then fiue hundred yeares
agoe by S'- Peter in his owne person, in spirit
accompanied with great multitude of Angels,
by night specially hallowed and dedicated to
God, (for the proofe whereof, they haue yet in
the Abbey, Saint Peters Cope to shew) that
from that time hitherward, was there neuer so
vndeuout a King, that durst violate that sacred
place, or so holy a Bishop, that durst presume
to consecrate it : and therefore (quoth the Arch-
bishop of Yorke) God forbid that any man
should for any thing earthly, enterprize to
breake the immunitie and liberty of that sacred
Sanctuarie, that hath beene the safeguard of
many a good mans life : and I trust (quoth hee)
with Gods grace we shall not need it. But for
what need soeuer, I would not we should doe

E

66 SANCTUARIES

it : I trust that she shall be with reason con-
tented, and all things in good manner obtained ;
but if it happen that I bring it not so to passe,
yet shall I toward it with my best, and you shall
all well perceiue, that there shall be of my
indeauour no lacke, if the Mothers dread, and
womanish feare be not the let."

Taking up his words, the Duke of Bucking-
ham rejoined : " Womanish feare, nay womanish
frowardnesse, for I dare take it upon my soule,
she well knoweth there is no need of any feare,
either for her sonne or for herselfe." He ex-
pressed the most absolute confidence that there
was no evil intended towards the young prince,
and gave at length his opinion of sanctuaries,
their use, and their abuse. In outspoken terms
he condemned the service to which the two
London sanctuaries of Westminster and St.
Martin's le Grand were often put, " the one
at the elbow of the citie, the other in the very
bowels."

"A Sanctuary," he added, "serueth alwayes to
defend the body of that man that standeth in
danger abroad, not of great hurt onely, but also
of lawfull hurt ; for against unlawfull harmes,
neuer Pope nor King intended to Priuiledge any
one place, for that Priuiledge hath euery place :
knoweth any man any place, wherein it is law-
full for one man to doe another wrong .? that no
man vnlawfuUy take hurt, that libertie, the King,
the Law, and very nature forbiddeth in euery

SANCTUARY OF WESTMINSTER 67

place, and maketh to that regard, for euery man,
eaery place a Sanctuary : but where a man is by
lawfull meaner in perill, there needeth he the
tuition of some speciall priuiledge, which is the
onely ground & cause of all Sanctuaries : from
which necessitie this noble Prince is farre, whose
loue to the King, nature and kindred proueth,
whose innocency to all the World, his tender
youth proueth, and so Sanctuary, as for him,
neyther none he needeth, nor none can he haue.
Men come not to Sanctuary, as they come to
Baptisme, to require it by their God-fathers ; he
must aske it himselfe, that must haue it ; and
reason, sith no man hath cause to haue it, but
whose conscience of his owne faulte maketh him
faine need to require it : what will then hath
yonder Babe ? which and if he had discretion to
require it, if need were, I dare say would now
be right angry with them that keepe him there :
and I would thinke without any scruple of con-
science, without any breach of Priuiledge, to be
somewhat more homely with them, that be there
Sanctuary men indeed : for if one goe to Sanc-
tuary with another mans goods why should not
the King, leaning his body at libertie, satisfie the
party of his goods, euen within the Sanctuary ?
for neyther King nor Pope can give any place
such a priuiledge, that it shall discharge a man
of his debts, being able to pay. And with that
diners of the Clergy that were present, whether
they said it for his pleasure, or as they thought,

68 SANCTUARIES

agreed plainely, that by the law of God, and of
the Church, the goods of a Sanctuary man, should
be deliuered in payment of his debts, and stolne
goods to the owner, and onely liberty reserued
him, to get his lining with the labour of his
hands. Verily (quoth the Duke) I thinke you
say very truth ; and what if a mans wife would
take Sanctuary, because shee list to runne from
her Husband ? I would weene if she could
alledge none other cause, he may lawfully with-
out any displeasure to Saint Peter, take her out
of Saint Peters Church by the arme. And if no
body may be taken out of Sanctuary, that saith
he will bide there, then if a childe will take
Sanctuary, because he feareth to goe to Schoole,
his Master must let him alone. And as simple
as the sample is, yet is there lesse reason in our
case then in that ; for therein, though it be a
childish feare ; yet is there at the leastwise some
feare, and herein is there none at all. And
verily, I haue often heard of Sanctuary-men,
but I never heard of Sanctuary Children. And
therefore, as for the Conclusion of my minde,
who so may haue deserued to neede it, if they
thinke it for their suretie, let them keepe it ; but
he can be no Sanctuary-man that had neither
wisdome to desire it, nor malice to deserue it,
whose life or libertie, can by no lawfull processe
stand in jeopardie : and hee that taketh one out
of the Sanctuary to doe him good, I say plainely
that he breaketh no Sanctuary."

SANCTUARY OF WESTMINSTER 69

The Duke succeeded in convincing almost
the whole of the council that the Protector had
no evil wish of any kind towards " the young
Babe," but not wishing to use any kind of force
to bring him forth from sanctuary, commissioned
the Cardinal Archbishop of Canterbury to do his
utmost to secure the boy with the queen's good
will. The arguments between the archbishop
and the queen are given at great length by Sir
Thomas More, who drew no doubt to some
extent on his imagination in setting them forth,
but at last the queen allowed herself to be con-
vinced of his uncle's pacific intention towards
the child, but not without much misgiving.

. . . . " and therewith all she said unto the
Childe was. Farewell mine own sweet son, God
send you good keeping : let me kisse you yet
once, ere you goe ; for God knoweth when wee
shall kisse together againe. And therewithal
she kissed him, and blessed him, turned her back
and wept, and went her way, leauing the child
weeping as fast. When the Lord Cardinall, and
those other Lords with him, had receiued the
young Duke, they brought him into the Star
Chamber, where the Protector took him in his
armes, and kissed him, with these words : Now
welcome my Lord, euen with all my heart.
Thereupon forth-with they brought him vnto the
King his brother, into the Bishops Pallace at
Pauls ; and from thence both of them through
the Citie of London, honourably attended into

70 SANCTUARIES

the Tower, out of which after that day they
neuer came againe."

The poor queen's fears were only too speedily
realised. She was still in the sanctuary when the
news of the murder in the Tower of the two boy
Princes reached her, and it was ten months be-
fore she and her daughters dared to withdraw
from the shelter of Westminster.

Dean Stanley reminds us that at this very
time another scion of a princely house was in
the monastery, also hiding from the terror of the
"Boar." Owen Tudor, uncle of Henry VII.,
had himself been sheltered here in the earlier
days of the dynasty of York, and was at that time
serving as a monk ; he was buried at the last in
the chapel of St. Blaise.

The oath taken by a fugitive to Westminster
is given in a fifteenth century MS. of the abbey. ^
He was called upon to swear truthfully why he
came, to promise to behave properly and faith-
fully whilst there, to submit to all corrections and
judgements of the president, to observe all con-
tracts which he might make whilst in sanctuary,
if a debtor to satisfy his creditors at the earliest
opportunity, not to sell victuals in sanctuary
without special leave of the archdeacon, not to
carry any defensive weapons, not to leave sanc-
tuary without permission, not to defame in
any way his fellow fugitives, and finally not

1 Niger Quakrmis, p. 139 ; cited in Vict. Hist, of London, i.
444-5-

SANCTUARY OF WESTMINSTER 71

to do or permit any violence within the pre-
cincts.

Among the miscellaneous papers of the West-
minster Abbey muniments are several relative to
the sanctuary privileges. These include copies of
pleadings in 1442, in a case wherein the abbot
of Westminster and others are charged with
assault and imprisonment by a prior of Kent,
in which privilege of sanctuary is pleaded ; an
original letter from Edward IV., dated 17th
May, 1474, to the archdeacon of Westminster,
wherein he states that he has heard of great
resort to the sanctuary of Westminster, and of
great crimes and abominable vices committed
there, he is to do his uttermost to restrain and
punish them ; and the punishment by Middle-
sex jurors in 15 10 of crimes committed by one
George Wolmer, alias Sawyer, of Lingfield,
Surrey, of his abjuration of the kingdom, of his
imprisonment by the abbot of Westminster, and
of his escape from prison. ^

One of the last fugitives to Westminster of
any eminence was John Skelton, the laureate
poet of dissolute life and the writer of dissolute
rhymes, though a priest and holding for a time
the Norfolk rectory of Diss. Towards the end
of his life, after being a consummate flatterer of
Cardinal Wolsey, Skelton took an extreme dislike
to his former patron, and satirised him with
much bitterness in print as well as in manuscript.

1 Reports of Hist. MSS. Commission, iv., appendix, 191.

72 SANCTUARIES

To escape the cardinal's officers sent out to arrest
him, Skelton took refuge in Westminster, where
he is said to have been well received by Abbot
Islip. He dared not again issue forth, and he
died in the shelter of the sanctuary on 21st June,
1529, only a few months before the fall of the
cardinal.

A paper of much value as to this sanctuary
shortly before its suppression, of the year 1532,
is among the Domestic State Papers of the Public
Record Office. It supplies

" The names of all such persons as have taken
the privilege and sanctuary of Holy St. Peter, of
Westminster, for divers trespass and offences
which now be there remaining and continuing
still, the 25 day of June in the 24 year of our
most gracious sovereign lord King Henry the
Vlllth."

The following remarkable list shows that
there were then fifty fugitives, including one
woman, under the protection of the abbey, as
life prisoners, one of whom had been there for
twenty years. Sixteen were there for felonies,
probably all robberies; eleven for murder or homi-
cide ; eighteen for debt ; and two for sacrilege.
We believe that this list has not hitherto been
printed.

Inprimis John Gonne for the dethe of A mane in Westm' all

moste XX yeres paste.
Willm StafiFerton marchaunte for dett of longe continuance.
Thomas Barkysdale Clothyer for dett to diverse p'sons.

SANCTUARY OF WESTMINSTER 73

Richarde Lynne Coriere for dett. A poore man.

Thomas Wayte poynte makere and Alice hys wyffe for dett.

John Cowlarde mercer for dett.

Johane Hode upon suspicon of murdre.

Rauffe Sampson servyngmane for felony.

John Walett for dett. A poore mane.

Willm Vaughan Bakere for felony.

Richarde Lute Draper for dett.

John Parkyne Vintnore for murdre of ii sergeants of London,

but a true . . .
Richard Vulstone for dett.
Sir James Whytakere preste for murdre.
Richarde Ade Grocere for dett.
John HufFa Goldsmythe for felony, this mane companyth

w* many suspecte persons.
Symon Hyde Barbore for felony, this maneys sone beinge

w' suspecte persons resortynge to hym and hys house.
Thomas Forde waterman for suspicion of felony.
Gyles Sowley Fyshmongere for dett.
John Albone Goldsmythe for suspicion of felony.
John ap Morgane Walshmane for ye dethe of a mane in

Wales wher he was . . .
John Mylles gentylmane for dette.
John Andrew taylor for dett and recevinge and lodgynge of

suspecte persones.
John Newington mercere for dett.
Stevne Hornere mercere for dett. A poore mane.
Morgane Albrey Walshmane for murdre.
Edward Brynnynhame for felony.
X'pofer Atkryke cappere for dett and suspicion upon a

murdre.
Rowlande Hyde cappere for murdre. A poore mane.
Philippe Costrowe alias Crownslawe Iryshmane for felony.
John Lovell for felony of Robbynge of churches and other.
Petere Fenton for felony.
Rogere Poley for felony.

Morgane Foulke Flescher A yonge mane for murdre.
Marmaduke ... for felony.
. . . Fartlawe for felony.

74 SANCTUARIES

Willm Calverley for roberye comytted upon the sea.

John ap Howell for felony. A poore mane for stellynge of

herrings.
Willm Saule taylor for dett.
Olyvere Kelly for murdre.
Thomas Hynde for murdre.

Richarde Gowre taylor for felony. A poore mane.
Degere Chonterell prentyce for conveynge of certayne of

hys m'' goodes.
Symonde grene Colyere for felony.
. . . Holte servyngman for dett.
John Busyne Bochere for dett.
Willm Symson for Robbynge and spoylynge of diverse

churches and other persons.
Roberte Hyll servyngmane for murdre.
Thomas Jenyns Bocher for dett.

With the dissolution of the great monastery,
the sanctuary rights were also dissolved. Under
Queen Mary, they were for a time re-established.
John Feckenham was installed as abbot, with
thirteen monks, after the old use, on St. Clement's
eve in November, 1555, and a few days after-
wards, namely, on 6th December, Abbot Feck-
enham and his convent made their procession.
Machyn, in his Diary, describes the scene, with
realistic pen : —

" Before him went all the Sanctuary men
with crosse keys upon their garments, and after
whent iij for murder ; on was the Lord Dacre's
son of the North, was wypyd with a shett about
him for kyllyng of on Master West squyre dwel-
lying besyd . . . and another theyfF that did long
to one of Master Controller and dyd kyll Richard
Eggylston, the Controller's tayller, and kylled

SANCTUARY OF WESTMINSTER 75

him in the Long Acres, the bak-syd Charyng
Crosse ; and a boy that kyld a byge boye that sold
papers and prynted bokes with the horling of a
stone, and yt hym under the ere in Westmynster
Hall : the boy was one of the chylderyn that was
at the sckoU then in the Abbey : the boy is a
hossear sune aboyff London-stone."

The following references to the restored
sanctuary rights occur in the Acts of the Privy
Council during Mary's reign : —

Eltham, 16 Aug., 1556.
" A lettre to the Deane of Westminstre to stale
John Bennet and John Williamson in safe warde, so as
they be fourthe comyng whenne they shalbe called for,
whiche Bennet and Williamson have broken prison and
nowe taken Sanctuarye in Westmynstre."

St. James, 26 Oct., 1556.
" A letter to therle of Sussex, signifieing that ordre
is given unto Mr. Sollicitour texamyn the two prisoners
fledd out of Burye Gaole into the Sanctuarie of West-
minstre, and if any matter woorthy knowleage shall fall
out his Lordship shalbe certified thereof; his Lordship
is eftsones desired to give ordre for the transportacion
of the make to Guysnes ; it is also v/ritten unto him
that the Deputye and Counsaill of Callaice are eftsones
written unto to make search for oone Bottes."

Richmond, 22 July, 1557.
" A lettre to the Abbot of Westminster, to cause
oon Edwarde Vaughan, presently broken out of the

76 SANCTUARIES

Tower and remaneng in the Sanctuarye, to be com-
mitted to a safe and severall place, so as none have
conference with him, and to procede to his furder
examinacion upon suche notes and artycles as shall
be brought unto him from Sir Edwarde Warner and
others, perswading him withall to be plaine and open
in such thinges he shall be examined of, whereunto the
rather to induce hym, he may declare for suche matters
as he playnely confesseth the Sanctuary shalbe avayle-
able unto him, but if he leave any thing undeclared
that may afterwardes be tryed against hym, the Sanc-
tuarye shall then serve hym nether for the same nor
for any of the rest."

Richmond, iZJuly, 1557.

" A lettre to the Abbot of Westminster to give
ordre that Edmond {sic') Vaughan, presently remayning
in the Sanctuarye, who standeth to be charged with
diverse felonies and will hitherto confess but oone of
them, be delivered over unto the Constable of the
Tower to be there further examined of the saide
felonie, signifieng unto the said Abbot that the same
Vaughan after his examinacion so taken shall be re-
stored againe to the Sanctuayre, if it shalbe his right
so to be, requiring him neverthelesse to Icepe the
matter secrete to himself, so as neither the parties
maye know thereof ne any other that might bring it
to his knowleage.

" A lettre to the Constable of the Towre to receyve
the saide Edwarde Vaughan at the Lord Abbotes handes
for the purpose aforesaidc."

Richmond, 6 Aug., 1557.
" A lettre to thabbot of Westminster that where
oone John Poole is detected to have byn one of those

SANCTUARY OF WESTMINSTER 'jj

that committed the late robberies in London, he is
willed, in case he shall come to the Sanctuarie, to
committ him to close prison, and to proceede to
examinacion of him in suche sorte as he hathe doon
with the reste."

St. James, 12 Dec, 1557.
" A lettre to the Abbot of Westminstre to send
hither with all spede a booke of the names of all suche
personnes, bothe men and women, as presently remayne
in the Sanctuarye, together with a note of the severall
causes for whiche they boolce {sic') the same."

St. James, 15 Dec, 1557.

"Lettres to Sir Giles Alington, knighte, to receyve
into his custodie the goodes of John Chapman, re-
mayning in the Sanctuarie, at thandes of Sir Robert
Tyrwitte and Sir John Cotton, knightes, and to see the
said Chapman's goodes and catalles furthe comyng and
aunswerable to the Quenes Majesties use.

" Lettres also to the said Robert Tyrwitt and Sir
John Cotton, knightes, for that purpose to deliver him
the same."

Richmond, 31 /z^/r, 1557.

" A lettre to thabbot of Westminster to cause oone
JefFry Reyman, which is fled into Sanctuary with the
clothes of one Thomas Bradley, to be stayed, and the
clothes redelyvered to the sayd Bradley, or the value
thereof."

The legislation with regard to sanctuaries
under Elizabeth, and the change in their con-
dition, is briefly discussed in the final chapter.
Within about a month of her accession (17th

78 SANCTUARIES

November) the following entry occurs in the
Privy Council Acts ; but it is the only case
before this council during her long reign, and
merely relates to a matter previously discussed.

Westminster, 29 Dec, 1558.
" A lettre to thabbote of Westminster to delyver
nyne clothes to oone Thomas Bradley, clothyer, owner
of the same, which were brought into the Sanctuary by
one GeofFrye Rayneman, taking first bondes of him
to be answerable to all suche as shall make clayme by
order of the lawes to the sayde clothes."

Among the Westminster Abbey documents
is a copy of a decree, of 1569, in the court of
Star Chamber, of one Whittaker claiming sanctu-
ary at Westminster to avoid payment of legacies.
The council pronounced against the privilege of
sanctuary including debt.

The State Papers of the Record Office in-
clude an undated petition of about this period,
addressed to Cecil by one Stephen Barrow, citizen
of London, desiring privilege of sanctuary at
Westminster, as he was at present unable to
satisfy his creditors.^

The subsequent gross scandals attached to
illicit sanctuary at Westminster, after all trace
of religious control or discipline had been sup-
pressed, do not come within the purpose of this
book.

^ Dom. State Papers, Elizabeth, vo\. xxxviii. 65.

CHAPTER IV

THE SANCTUARY OF ST. MARTIN LE GRAND

The Collegiate Church founded in 1056 — Wide privileges granted by
the Conqueror — Irregularity of the canons reflected in the con-
duct of the sanctuary men — The grave charges of 1403 — The
results of Kneve's thefts forfeited to the Dean — Conflict between
Dean Bourchier and the Mayor of London, 1430 — Grave dispute
with the Mayor and Corporation in 1440 — Important pleadings
of Dean Cawdray and the Corporation — William Cayme, an
associate of Jack Cade, and Sir William Oldhall, ex-Speaker of
the House of Commons, in sanctuary — Lawlessness in 1454-5
redressed by ordinances of 1456-7 — Statutes of 1463 and 1477
against debased jewelry, exempting St. Martin's — Bishop of Ely
in sanctuary, 1471 — Michael Forrest, one of the murderers
of the two young princes, died here — Henry VII.'s violation of
this sanctuary — United to Westminster Abbey — The College con-
fiscated to the crown in 1548 — Subsequent abuses of the site —
Granted to the Post Office in 1815.

Ingelric, a priest who held some official posi-
tion under Edward the Confessor, in conjunction
with his brother Girard, built a church within
the city of London in the year 1056, dedicated
to St. Martin, and founded it as a college of
secular canons. Of this college Ingelric became
the first dean. William the Conqueror, in
1068, confirmed the canons in their lands and
added materially to their benefactions and rights.
The Norman king evidently thought highly
of Ingelric, conferring on him and his fellow
canons every possible privilege, such as sac and

8o SANCTUARIES

soc, tol and team, infangenthef, blodwyte, burgh-
brice, and miskenning ; he also exempted the
college from all episcopal and archidiaconal
jurisdiction, as well as from services due to the
crown/

This charter of the Conqueror was held to
confer right of sanctuary of a permanent char-
acter on all fugitive felons or those liable to
arrest, a right which was probably first con-
ferred upon it by its pre-Conquest founders.

However beneficial chartered sanctuaries may
have been, nay undoubtedly were, in mitigating
the extreme severity of the medieval criminal
code in the less populated districts like Beaulieu
or Culham, or in small towns such as Beverley,
Durham, or Hexham, under strict religious
supervision, it certainly seems absolutely un-
suitable to have such a refuge for felons and
other offenders in the very centre of a closely
packed and considerable population. Moreover
it would only be possible to maintain order in
such a place if the ecclesiastical authorities were
stern and regular in exacting service and obedi-
ence from their criminal guests. But the canons
of St. Martin's were, throughout their history,
for the most part non-resident, and the discipline
among their vicars notoriously irregular ; hence
it came to pass, as an almost necessary sequel.

^ Kempe's The Church of St. Martin le Grand {\?>i^\ Dugdale's
Monasticon, vi. 1324. There is a good summary of the history of this
college in the Victoria History of London., i. 555-65.

ST. MARTIN LE GRAND 8i

that the sanctuary men of this house were
frequently lax in their lives, and at last became
at times a scourge to the neighbourhood, so
that Richard II. had some justification in speak-
ing of it as " a nest of corruption." Yet the
fault chiefly lay with our sovereigns who treated
the college as a free-chapel and peculiar of
their own, and often used the emoluments of
the deanery and prebends to find incomes for the
least worthy of their clerical officials.

Complaint was made by the Commons to
the King in Parliament, in 1403, that various
persons of different conditions, resident both in
the city of London and in its suburbs, as well
as from other parts of the kingdom, came from
day to day, in the absence of their masters or
employers, to the college of St. Martin le Grand
with certain of their masters goods in their
possession, as fugitives ; and that such stolen
goods were not subject to pressure or execution
from the secular law, and that these very goods
were sometimes seized by the servants of the
college, and taken as forfeit to the said house.
Further charges were made to the effect that
debtors and merchants were in the habit of
flying to this sanctuary, in order to live there
unmolested, upon the substance that they carried
with them in their flight. Some of the fugitives
forged and sealed instruments in the name of
third parties, to their great distress and con-
fusion. Others engaged outside persons to

F

82 SANCTUARIES

purchase goods to be bought for cash at the
sanctuary ; but when brought there, the vendors
could neither get payment nor have their goods
back. From time to time, there were also
received into the said college, " murderers,
traitors, robbers, money clippers, and other
felons, malefactors and rioters," who made dis-
turbance by day and issued forth by night to
commit outrages, after which they betake them-
selves again to the college. Such offenders had
hitherto escaped the operations of law owing to
the privileges of the college, and the petitioners
prayed for redress. The king promised that
these charges, probably couched in exaggerated
terms, should be investigated, but no vigorous
steps were taken. ^

In 141 6, when John Stone was dean, one
Henry Kneve, who had stolen a signet ring, a
pyx for the reserved Sacrament, certain coins
and other valuable articles, took sanctuary at
St. Martin's, and deposited the results of his
thefts with a dweller in the precincts. Subse-
quently this delinquent fled from the sanctuary,
and the dean's officials seized on the property
as a waif within the franchise of the church.

In 1430, Thomas Bourchier,^ dean of St.
Martin's, petitioned the king for redress against
William Estfield, mayor of London, and Thomas

^ Parliamentary Rolls, vol. iii. 503-4.

2 Archbishop of Canterbury, 1454-1486. Dean Hook in his ^rc/^-
bishops of Canterbury blunders badly in making Bourchier dean of
St. Martin's in the far graver dispute of 1440.

ST. MARTIN LE GRAND 83

Large and William Chertsey, sheriffs. They had
by force withdrawn from St. Martin's sanctuary
one Henry Ciprian, a canon of Waltham, and
committed him to prison. Henry VI. promptly
intervened and compelled the city officials to
restore the abducted fugitive.

On ist September, 1440, a soldier prisoner
was being conducted from Newgate to the
Guildhall, and when passing the south gate of
St. Martin's sanctuary, five of his fellow soldiers
came out of Panyer Alley, took him from the
officer by violence, and rushed him into the
sanctuary. The sheriffs in their indignation
proceeded at once with the alderman of the ward
and the city chamberlain and an armed posse to
St. Martin's and demanded the release to them
of the prisoner and his rescuers. This was
refused, when the sheriffs boldly caused all six to
be seized and committed them to safe keeping.
According to the complaint made immediately
by the canons to their dean, this outrage on
sanctuary was done with great violence and with
drawn daggers, in the presence of a mob of hun-
dreds of people, the prisoners were stripped to
their linen clothes and led to Newgate " all
naked, two together, cheyned by the necke, and
manacled as traitours."

Richard Cawdray, the dean of St. Martin's, was
at Cambridge, when the canons' letter reached
him, and instantly returned to assert the liberties
of the college. In the first place he applied to

84 SANCTUARIES

the sheriffs for the restitution of the offenders,
and on their refusal lodged formal complaint
with the mayor and aldermen, who appointed
him a hearing in five days. Rejecting this delay,
the dean proceeded to Windsor and made com-
plaint to Henry VI. On nth September, the
king sent letters under privy seal by Lord Hunt-
ingdon commanding the instant restoration of the
prisoners. The corporation persisted in delaying
the matter as long as they dared, and eventually
the whole matter was argued in the Star Chamber,
before the Lord Treasurer, the Chancellor, and
the Archbishop of Canterbury.

The sheriffs affirmed that if St. Martin's was
really endowed with any chartered sanctuary
privilege, it would only be under circumstances
in which the life or limb of the subject were in
jeopardy, and that the church and its precincts
had formed " beyond tyme of mynde, parcel of the
citie of London." They also said that the soldier,
a prisoner in Newgate, had been rescued by a
carefully laid plot of his companions, one of whom
summoned him on a pretended action of debt
before the sheriffs at the Guildhall, so that he
might be led past St. Martin's gate. The sheriffs,
as they alleged, had entered St. Martin's and
withdrawn the offenders without violence, one
as their prisoner, and the others as trespassers
against the king's officer.

The dean, in his rejoinder, claimed that special
sanctuary rights pertained to this site before the

ST. MARTIN LE GRAND 85

Conquest, and cited the Conqueror's charter in
Saxon and Latin. It had ever since enjoyed this
privilege, which had been confirmed by a statute
of 50 Edward III. He further stated, as a
curious fact, that when the king's justices held
their sittings in St. Martin's gate for the trial of
prisoners for treason or felony, the accused were
placed before them on the other side of the
street, and carefully guarded from advancing ; for
if they once passed the water channel in the
centre of the street, they could claim the fran-
chise of the sanctuary of Holy Church pertaining
to St. Martin's, and the proceedings against them
would be void. Moreover various sheriffs of
London had distinctly acknowledged that this was
a legal sanctuary, for since the passing of the Act
of 3 Richard II. to restrain fraudulent debtors,
they had often made the five statutory proclama-
tions before the gates of St. Martin which were
necessary before the goods of a sanctuary debtor
could be distrained. The last argument of the
dean, in addition to the production of a variety
of confirmatory royal charters, including one by
King Henry VI. himself in the first year of his
reign, was personal and amusingly sarcastic. He
argued that the citizens of London had reason
rather to support than to impugn the liberties
of his church, for many worshipful members of
the corporation had, for debt or other trespass,
received the shelter of its privileges, and of late
years to the number of three hundred or more.

86 SANCTUARIES

The sheriffs did their best to combat the
dean's arguments, and brought forward a few
telHng facts as to jurisdiction exercised in past
days by the city with regard to certain parts of
the precincts ; but their recital of cases of mur-
derers obtaining sanctuary here in the reigns of
Edward II. and Edward III. were entirely beside
the mark, for all sanctuaries, chartered or other-
wise, sheltered for a time or permanently those
guilty of homicide throughout Christendom.

Sir John Hody, chief justice of the King's
Bench, and Sir Richard Newton, chief justice of
the Common Pleas, were then called in to give
their opinions. They agreed that the charters pro-
duced, together with the bull of Pope Alexander,
and the prescriptive use of the privileges time
out of mind, established the sanctuary rights of
St. Martin's ; they also alluded to the like privi-
leges of Beverley, Westminster, and Glastonbury,
all of which, they said, stood in their respective
charters in general, rather than in special words.

Thereupon Henry directed his Chancellor
and Treasurer to decree that the prisoners should
be restored to sanctuary, and that " the lordes of
his counsail and bloode, in the sterred chamber "
should fine the sheriffs for disobedience to his
letters and writ.^

The connection of one of Jack Cade's

^ All these proceedings are set forth in full detail in B. Mus.
Lansd. MSS., No. 170, which is a collection of transcripts of records
of papers pertaining to the city of London, belonging to Sir Julius
Csesar. Ff 52 to 118 relate to the sanctuary liberties of St. Martin's,

ST. MARTIN LE GRAND 87

associates with the sanctuary of Westminster has
ah-eady been noted. Another of the ringleaders
of that uprising, William Cayme, of Sitting-
bourne, fled in 1450 to the sanctuary of St.
Martin. As this was a case of treason, certain
of the king's advisers assured him that this was
a matter in which he might use his pleasure in
limiting the privilege in a church under his
peculiar jurisdiction. Demand was therefore
made for the surrender of Cayme to the king's
officers. Dean Cawdray had, however, already
secured the rebel in the sanctuary prison, and
on receipt of the writ of privy seal repaired to
the king, produced his charters and bulls, and
the king, with the advice of his council, con-
sented to waive his claim, but recommended that
the traitor should be kept close for fear of further
mischief. Cayme, however, soon afterwards
received the royal pardon, and became " a
cherished person " with the Duke of Somerset.

About this time there arose fierce dissension
between the Dukes of Somerset and York. At
the former's instigation. Sir William Oldhall,
Speaker of the House of Commons and Cham-
berlain to the Duke of York, was indicted, in
1452, for complicity in the Cade rebellion. He
was found guilty, outlawed, and attainted on
22nd June, but he had meanwhile fled to the

and are thus headed : "All such Uberties of St. Martin's Le Graunde
in London, w* heretofore have ben most secretly kept from know-
ledge of this Citie."

88 SANCTUARIES

sanctuary of St. Martin. His surrender as a
traitor was demanded, but Cawdray again resisted
and carried his point with the king. Soon after-
wards, however, an official of the Court, Walter
Burgh, was dangerously wounded in the adjacent
streets on 20th January, 1452— 3, by some assassins,
and Oldhall's enemies raised the repoi't that he
was the chief aggressor. A number of Somerset's
party burst open the gates shortly before mid-
night, found Oldhall concealed in the church,
and carried him off in triumph to Westminster
pakce. But within two days the sanctuary
rights once again prevailed and Oldhall was
replaced in St. Martin's. The king desired
that certain of his officials should be placed in
the sanctuary to watch Oldhall's movements
and to prevent his escape ; but the dean was
successful in resisting this abridgment of his
privileges. The triumph of Dean Cawdray was
complete ; the Earls of Salisbury, Wiltshire, and
Worcester, the Barons de Lisle and de Moleyns,
together with Mathew Philip, sheriff of London,
and the Alderman of the ward, who all took
part in the midnight violation of sanctuary, made
full confession of their wicked deed, and after-
wards were absolved, having made reparation to
God and St. Mary, according to their ability, by
certain huge tapers of wax, gold, and jewels, and
other oblations; and this because they were ipso
facto excommunicate according to several papal
bulls, especially those of Alexander and Lucius.

ST. MARTIN LE GRAND 89

Sir William Oldhall, meanwhile, remained
strictly confined to this sanctuary until after the
battle of St. Albans in May, 1455, when he
obtained his release and the reversal of the out-
lawry on 9th July.

In 1454—5, when the flames of civil war were
raging, the more lawless of the residents within
the precincts of this sanctuary took occasion to
come forth bent on violence and robbery. On
one occasion, after they had assaulted and
wounded diverse citizens, retreating within the
immunity of their territory, the mayor and
aldermen seem to have been justified in forcing
the gates, at the head of a body of citizens, and
carrying off the ringleaders. On another occasion,
when there was a conflict between the citizens
and foreigners, the sanctuary men issued forth
and took the side of the former. Two sanctuary
men were afterwards tried for having plundered
Antonio Moricin and other Lombards, and were
hung at Tyburn.

These disturbances resulted in the issue by
the King's Council of the Star Chamber, on
5th February, 1456-7, of a series of ordinances
for the better government of St. Martin's sanc-
tuary. The main points then enacted are as
follows: — (i) Every fugitive desirous of enjoy-
ing the immunities and privileges to declare before
the dean or his deputy the cause of his fear in
going thither, whether it be for treason or felony
surmised upon him, or for other causes, the same

90 SANCTUARIES

to be registered together with his name ; (2) to
give up at his first entry all manner of weapon
and armour, and never to use anything of the
kind except a reasonable knife to kerve withall
his meat, and the said knife to be pointlesse ;
(3) every vagabond, open thief, robber, murderer
or felon, of known evil repute, to find sureties
for his good behaviour, to last for a quarter of
a year after his departure, and to be kept in ward
until security is found ; (4) all gates, posterns,
and doors to be surely closed between nine at
night and six in the morning from All Hallows
to Candlemas, and for the rest of the year from
nine at night until four in the morning ; (5) any
fugitive buying stolen goods, to make full resti-
tution to the party aggrieved ; (6) any sanctuary
man roving forth by night or day to do any evil
deed to be committed to ward and thereto
remain so long as he is in sanctuary ; (7) subtle
pickers of locks, conterfeiters of keys, contrivers
of seals, forgers of false evidences, and workers
of counterfeit chains, beads, or plate falsely
uttered as silver or gold, not to abide in the
sanctuary ; (8) no sanctuary for strumpets and
bawds ; (9) all games of hazard prohibited ;
(10) all artificers dwelling within the sanctuary
(as well barbers as others) to keep holy the
Sundays and great festivals ; and (11) that every
one on admission be sworne to obey these
articles.

A statute of Edward IV., of the year 1463,

ST. MARTIN LE GRAND 91

directed against fraudulent makers of debased
or counterfeit goldsmith's work, made an extra-
ordinary exception with regard to the liberties
of Great St. Martin, to the following effect :
" Provided always, that this ordinance and act,
nor any other ordinance or act made, or to be
made in the present parliament, shall extend or
in any wise be prejudicial or hurtful to Robert
Styllington, clerk, dean of the free-chapel of
our lord the king, of St. Martin le Grand of
London, nor to his successors of the said chaple
hereafter ; nor to the dean and chapiter of the
same chaple, as in and for all manner of privileges,
liberties, franchises, rights and customs in any
manner pertaining to them ; nor to any person
or persons dwelling or inhabiting, or which
shall hereafter inhabit and dwell within the
sanctuary and precinct of the same chaple, and
especially within the lane commonly called St.
Martin's Lane." Another act of the same reign
with regard to goldsmiths, in 1477, repeated
this exception as to St. Martin le Grand, adding
to it the sanctuary precincts of St. Peter of
Westminster.^ The unintended result of these
exemptions and their misinterpretation led to
this old sanctuary site being used by fabricators
of inferior and counterfeit jewellery long after
the dissolution of the religious houses and all
their privileges.

During the bitterest of the York and

1 Stat. 3 Edw. IV., cap. 4, s. 6 ; 17 Edw. IV., cap. i.

92 SANCTUARIES

Lancaster strifes this sanctuary afforded temporary
protection to various leaders or persons of birth
and reputation. Elizabeth de Vere, Countess of
Oxford, and sister of Richard, Earl of Warwick,
was here for a time soon after her husband had
joined her brother's party ; ^ and the Bishop of
Ely, with other prelates, was sheltered at St.
Martin's in 1471-^

Michael Forrest, " a noted ruffian," was one
of the two actual murderers of the young Princes
in the Tower in 1483 ; on the accession of
Henry VII., Sir William Tyrell, the immediate
instigator of the crime, was executed, but Forrest
gained sanctuary at St. Martin's, dying, accord-
ing to Sir Thomas More, a most miserable death,
" rotting away piecemeal."

When Sir Roger Clifford was being taken
through London on his way to execution on
Tower Hill, for taking up arms against Richard
III., he was conducted through Newgate Street,
and as the procession passed the gate of St.
Martin's, he made a strenuous but vain effort to
escape from custody and gain that city of refuge.

In 1495 Henry VII. acted with much daring
by dragging forth from St. Martin's Sanctuary
four persons accused of slanderously libelling him.
James Stanley, brother of the Earl of Derby,
the new dean, lacked the grit of his predecessor

' "The Cowntesse of Oxenford is stylle in Saynt Martins, I heer
no worde of hyr." — Paston Letters., vol. i. p. 290.
- Ibid., vol. ii. p. 52.

ST. MARTIN LE GRAND 93

Cawdray. These four men, Thomas Bagnal,
John Scot, John Hethe, and John Kennington,
were arraigned in the Guildhall on 22nd Feb-
ruary, 1495—6, for forging seditious libels to the
slander of the king and his council. Three of
them were condemned to death and were hung
at Tyburn on 26th February. But Bagnal had
the wit to simply plead for restoration to sanc-
tuary ; he was reprieved till the next term, and
apparently restored to St. Martin's.^

The king would scarcely have been bold
enough to take this action, had he not succeeded
in obtaining a bull from Innocent VIII. in 1487,
confirmed by Alexander VI. in 1493, excluding
every form of high treason in England from
sanctuary benefit.^

Henry VII., towards the close of his reign,
decided to merge the royal free-chapel of St.
Martin's in the great foundation of St. Peter's,
Westminster. James Stanley, the last dean, was
preferred to the bishopric of Ely in 1 506 ; he
died in 151 5. After the latter date the abbots
of Westminster assumed the office of dean of St.
Martin's, and its independent history ceased.

In the year i 548, when all chantries, colleges,
&c., were confiscated by Edward VI., " the
venerable fabric of St. Martin's church, being
at the disposal of the Crown, was levelled to the
ground, the spot which had for ages resounded
by day and night with the seraphic music, and

1 Stow's Survey, 479. "^ See the last chapter,

94 SANCTUARIES

had been distinguished by all the splendid
pageantry of the Roman Church, was now
occupied by a number of new buildings ; on
the site of the High Altar a large wine tavern
was erected, and many other houses built over
the whole precinct, and let at high rents to
foreigners, who there, says Stow, ' claimed the
benefit of privileges granted to the canons, serv-
ing God day and night, as in the words of the
Conqueror's charter, which could hardly be
wrested to artificers, buyers and sellers, other-
wise than is mentioned in the 21st chapter of
St. Matthew's Gospel.'" ^

We have no concern here with the extra-
civic immunities tacitly granted to the dwellers
within this ancient liberty in Elizabethan days,
or to the disorders that arose from the presence
of a horde of low-bred and ill-governed foreigners
of mixed nationalities.

In 18 15, the situation of the General Post
Office in Lombard Street was found to be too
confined and incapable of extension. An Act of
Parliament was therefore passed for clearing the
considerable area once occupied by the ancient
collegiate sanctuary church and its precincts.
The name of St. Martin's le Grand has, after a
century of use, become imperishably associated
with the beneficent workings of our great and
ever-growing Postal System.

' Kempe's St. Mar/in's, 164-5.

^""'^ Bounds aiirl Limits about
thisildt mentioned, been con-
taincaintheAbbofsClaim;and
15 well proved to be good Sun-
duary, by divers Witneffcs
Iworii in the Chancerjr, as ii-ell
Freemen of the City, as other
credible Perfons.

§ /

Goo^ Sin3iiiryev
uftd.

The Chanel of the South fide. :

Plax of St. Martins-le-Grand, 1598.
(Stow's Survey of London, vol. i., Book iii. p. no.)

CHAPTER V

THE SANCTUARY OF DURHAM

Death of St. Cuthbert, and burial at Lindisfarne — Sanctity attached
to his body — The monks, driven forth by the Danes, at length
find a resting-place at Chester le Street — Claim of sanctuary —
The see and St. Cuthbert's body moved to Durham in tenth
century — Reginald of Durham's Life and Miracles of St. Cuthbert
— The hunted stag of 1 165 — Violation of the sanctuary, and murder
of Bishop Walcher — Analysis of the registers of sanctuary seekers
— Extract from The Rites of Durham — " Sanctuary knockers."

The story of the sanctuary of Durham centres
round St. Cuthbert, the ascetic Bishop of Lindis-
farne, the details of whose Hfe, both genuine and
legendary, are so singularly picturesque. Bede
tells us that St. Cuthbert, shortly before his death
in 687, desired to be buried in the oratory of his
cell on Fame Island. But the monks of Lindis-
farne besought him that his bodymight beinterred
in their church. To this he replied —

" I think it better for you that I should
repose here, on account of the fugitives and
criminals who may flee to my corpse for refuge ;
and when they have thus obtained an asylum,
inasmuch as I have enjoyed the fame, humble
though I am, of being a servant of Christ, you
may think it necessary to intercede for such be-
fore the secular rulers, and so you may have
trouble on my account." The monks made

96 SANCTUARIES

rejoinder that such labour would be agreeable
and easy ; and at last the dying saint yielded to
their request to bury his body in the inmost parts
of the church of Lindisfarne, " that you may be
able to visit my tomb yourselves, and to control
the visits of all other persons." He also asked
them if ever they were compelled to leave Lin-
disfarne that they would carry his body with
them whithersoever they went/

When Lindisfarne was ravaged by a pagan
invasion, Bishop Eardulf and the monks took St.
Cuthbert's coffin with them in their flight. For
seven years they wandered in Cumberland, Gal-
loway, and divers parts of Northumbria, ever
bearing their precious burden with them, and at
each place of sojourn erecting a church or chapel
dedicated in his honour. At length in 883
Guthred, the Christian king of the Danes, gave
Eardulf as his see town Chester le Street, a few
miles to the north of Durham. According to a
statement of Simeon of Durham, St. Cuthbert
appeared in a vision and directed that Guthred
should be chosen as king of Northumbria, and
that after he became king he was to grant to the
saint all the land between the Tyne and the
Wear, and also to sanction that any one flying
to him {i.e. to his shrine), whether for homicide
or any other necessity, was to have peace for
thirty-seven days and nights.^

' Bede's Vita S. Cuthberti, cap. xxxviii.
^ Historia de Sancio Cuthberio^ cap. xiii.

THE SANCTUARY OF DURHAM 97

The body remained at Chester for about a
century, when Bishop Ealdhun, fearing another
Danish inroad, carried the shrine to Ripon.
After a few months, the bishop left Ripon in-
tending to return to Chester, but he missed the
direct road, and in accordance, as was supposed,
with the saint's guidance, the body was first de-
posited in a chapel or shelter formed of branches
of trees, soon afterwards transferred to a church
of timber, and at last, on 4th September, 998,
was removed into Bishop Ealdhun's stone-built
church. When William the Conqueror was
ravaging the north in 1069, the Durham monks
fled with the body, for safety, once again to
Lindisfarne. But they returned the next year,
and in 11 04 the body was translated to the
noble new church erected by Bishop William of
St. Carileph.

The fullest ancient account of St. Cuthbert
was written by one Reginald, a monk of Dur-
ham, who made a wonderful collection of the
legends pertaining to the great saint. He wrote
in the twelfth century during the reign of
Stephen. His Lihellus de Admirandis Beati
Cuthberti Virtutibus is of great value on account
of the spirited records of scenes and inci-
dents of his own day, and is written, for the
most part, in a singularly fluent style, and with
much elaboration of descriptive details. This
manuscript, in the possession of the dean and
chapter of Durham, was the first volume printed

G

98 SANCTUARIES

by the eminent Surtees Society in the year 1835.
It is set forth in the original Latin, with a brief
Enghsh abstract of most of the chapters. Two
or three of the one hundred and forty-one chap-
ters pertain to the subject of sanctuary. Chapter
sixty tells how a youth in the service of the
bishop of Durham was slain. The person ac-
cused of killing him fled for refuge to the
cathedral church claiming its protection. There-
upon the friends and associates of the dead man
surrounded all the exits from the church and
monastery by day and night with an armed
guard. Whilst the monks were at supper, six
of them entered the church, and two of them
made their way to the actual shrine of St. Cuth-
bert, where they found the accused youth in
earnest prayer. They inflicted on him eleven
deadly wounds ; a great multitude of people
assembled, indignant at this outrage done at the
very shrine of the great saint, and at the de-
filement of their church. The bishop on the
morrow reconciled the church with due rites ;
he absolved the wounded man, who contrary to
all hope recovered after a miraculous fashion.
The next chapter proceeds to show how acts of
sacrilege against such a sanctuary as this, could
not possibly prosper, and describes how one of
the two men who had violated the immunity
of the church in this terrible fashion, was caught
in a village three miles from Durham, where his
horse refused to carry him further in spite of

THE SANCTUARY OF DURHAM 99

whip and spurs ; he was heavily ironed, thrust
into a subterranean prison, there to await a
terrible death.

Chapters sixty-four and sixty-five supply a
vivid picture of the state of society in the wilder
parts of England during the disturbed and very
lax times of the rule of Stephen. The feast of
St. Cuthbert, which lasted throughout the octave,
was being celebrated in the forest of Arden on
the boundaries of Nottinghamshire where the
village church was dedicated to that northern
saint. It was a year of pestilence and famine,
but the parish priest determined to celebrate the
festival by sacrificing all that he possessed to make
a feast for all comers, to feed the poor, to relieve
the needy, to clothe the naked, to comfort the
miserable, and to entertain, at his own table, the
better class of folk, both clerks and laymen.
Robbers were at this time numerous, gathering
strength from the lenity of King Stephen, whose
character for mildness, patience, mercy, and good
nature is described by this contemporary writer
at considerable length. The whole population
of the surrounding twenty miles had assembled
at the priest's house. But a great band of robbers,
who had been killing, stealing and burning, plun-
dering the poor and driving off their cattle and
sheep, came to the village with their spoils.
Alarmed at their approach, many of the inhabi-
tants hid themselves in woods and caves, whilst
others took refuge in the church and churchyard

loo SANCTUARIES

of St. Cuthbert, together with their goods and
stock. The bandits, irritated at the barrenness
of the vicinity, did not hesitate to violate the
sanctuary, cleared off all the live stock in the
churchyard, and, in spite of the remonstrances
of the priest, broke open the doors of the church
and seized all the valuables they could find.
They then withdrew^ v^ith their booty to a plot
of ground in the neighbourhood surrounded by
w^ater. Here they killed and roasted some of the
stock they had seized, ate, drank and danced,
and in the end fell asleep, having set a watch
round the margin of the island. In addition to
archers and armour-bearers, this gang of bandits
mustered eighty fully armed men. The priest,
full of confidence in the aid of St. Cuthbert, whose
local church had been so shockingly violated, and
hearing of the sleepy condition of the malefactors,
resolved on an attack, although he was only able
to gather round him fourteen of his servants and
villagers. A curious stratagem was adopted.
Finding the robbers in a drunken sleep, the little
band of invaders set to work to produce all the
loudest and strangest noises they could contrive.
Some set to work to mend or rather pretend to
mend carts, some sharpening blunted plough-
shares, some cutting stakes, and others, as it were,
raising bundles of stakes on their shoulders.
These noises they varied by uttering the loudest
yells and the most piercing of shrieks. Mean-
while the stolen animals crowded together on the

THE SANCTUARY OF DURHAM loi

island were the first to take alarm ; the horses
neighed with all their might ; the sheep broke
loose with wild bleatings ; the oxen lowed and
charged the robbers with their horns ; the swine
grunted and ran amongst the drunken sleepers,
until at last the robbers, losing their wits amidst
this confused din and uproar, proceeded viciously
to attack one another, whilst others leaped
into the fires, and some endeavoured to escape by
swimming. The result was that within an hour
not a single robber remained, but they left behind
them a great store of arms, horses, money, and
garments, whilst the woodland paths glittered
with articles of valueand with brightly emblazoned
shields, which they had flung aside in the course
of their flight. Much of this spoil was restored
to those owners who were able to identify their
property. All the rest was gathered together in
the cemetery round the church of St. Cuthbert,
and its value utilised towards making satisfaction
for the indignity done to this house of worship,
dedicated to the Northumbrian saint.

Chapter one hundred and twenty-nine tells
the story of an indignity done to another of
the seventy ancient churches dedicated to St.
Cuthbert. This was the church of Plumbland,
a village in Cumberland not far from Cocker-
mouth. William, King of Scotland, was at that
time laying waste the whole of the country round
Carlisle with fire and sword. The people, in
order to secure, if possible, safety for their lives

I02 SANCTUARIES

and substance, lodged themselves and their goods
in the churches and churchyards, building in the
latter huts covered with straw. The parishioners
of Plumbland, like their neighbours, flocked to
their church and churchyard, lodging in the
former the more valuable of their goods, such
as gold and silver and the best of their garments.
Within this church, one Cospatric, the son of
Ulf, a knight of great wealth, deposited a chest
containing much money, well secured by locks,
placing it, so to speak, in the special custody of
the Blessed Cuthbert ; but at nightfall, a cunning
thief entered the church by means of a false key,
picked the locks of the chest, and abstracted a bag
of money, which he hid under a heap of straw in
an unoccupied hut. But before concealing this
booty, he took out of the bag a coin of Scottish
issue, which he afterwards offered to the mistress
of an ale-house. The woman refused to take the
coinage of a king at war with England, and a
servant of Cospatric, who happened to be present,
recognised the piece of money as one that he had
seen in the hands of his master. At first the thief
denied this with many oaths, but at last he con-
fessed all, and eventually, at the solicitation of
the rector of the church, was pardoned.

An incident of a very different character is
recorded in Reginald's eighty-sixth and two fol-
lowing chapters. On more than one occasion
in modern days a hunted stag has sought sanc-
tuary in the porch of a church, and even within

THE SANCTUARY OF DURHAM 103

a church itself. A few years ago Mr. Thomas
Blinks painted a clever picture descriptive of
such an incident in connection with the Devon
and Somerset Stag-hounds. Monk Reginald de-
scribes a scene of this character which took place
in the year 1 165, giving various picturesque and
curious details. Robert Fitz Philip, a knight
of the Lothian district of Scotland, was hunting
on the 4th September, the day of the festival of
the translation of the relics of St. Cuthbert, at
a time of the year when the deer were fat and
easily taken. On this occasion a stag of wonder-
ful size and with splendid antlers, alarmed by the
sounding of the horns of the huntsmen and the
baying of the hounds, after a prolonged run was
on the very eve of capture, when it suddenly came
in sight, in the midst of the woods, of a church
dedicated to the Blessed Cuthbert. The hunted
stag had just sufficient strength to leap over the
churchyard hedge. The hounds in full pursuit
in an instant checked themselves, unable as it
were to take a single step within an area con-
secrated to the peace of St. Cuthbert. The stag
quietly passed through the cemetery, as though
well aware that it was in a place of absolute
immunity, and lay down within the shelter of
the church's porch. The most excited of the
huntsmen, noticing that the very hounds refused
to enter the churchyard, felt bound to imitate
their example, and the knight himself, leaping
from his horse, forbad any one to disturb the

I04 SANCTUARIES

stag in sanctuary. A great multitude assembled
in honour of the festival ; some began to dance
and leap and to put the stone and engage in
various sports, whilst others were spectators of
the games. But with a few, the exhausted stag,
reposing within the porch, was the sole object
of attraction. At last a mischievous boy, insti-
gated by a profane person older than himself,
attacked the poor hunted animal with a stake.
The stag thus roused from its resting-place,
bounded into the midst of the party of dancers,
gored to death the son of the person who had
urged the lad to disturb it, and bounded over
the fence of the churchyard. On its road to
the woods, the stag was killed by its original
pursuers ; but on their hearing of the death
which it had just occasioned, they left it upon
the spot as a homicide not to be eaten. Six
months later a craftsman of a neighbouring
village, whose trade it was to make combs,
draughts-men, chess-men, dice, spigots and such
like articles of horn, found the remains of this
stag. Attempting to cut off its horns, to be
used as materials in his trade, he was astounded
to find that a stream of blood came from the
incision he had made, and was obliged to give
up the attempt, alarmed at the character of
this miraculous intervention. It is added that
Etheldred, the Abbot of Rievaulx, going into
Lothian, visited Melrose, heard the particulars
of those extraordinary stag-hunting incidents.

THE SANCTUARY OF DURHAM 105

and recorded them in these three chapters from
the Hps of Robert Fitz PhiHp himself, who had
married his niece.

The insistence of the monk Reginald on the
superiority of St. Cuthbert to all other Enghsh
saints is supported by remarkable evidence of the
authenticity of which he had apparently no doubt.
He states that a certain person of noble birth in
the south of England was afflicted with leprosy,
and wished to have recourse for his cure to the
prayers of the greatest of his country's saints.
St. Cuthbert, St. Edmund of Bury, and St. Ethel-
dreda of Ely were generally considered to be the
most illustrious, and he lighted three great candles
of similar size in their honour, resolved to visit
the shrine and beg the prayers of the one whose
candle first burnt out. St. Cuthbert's candle was
the first consumed, and the leper consequently
set out for Durham and was there cured. An-
other like story, of the year 1 172, tells how a noble
Norwegian youth was suddenly afflicted with
blindness, deafness, and lack of speech. His
brother took him pilgrimages to the shrines of
various saints, but after six years of journeyings
he was no better. A holy bishop then recom-
mended him to try English saints, saying there
were none of more renown than St. Cuthbert
and St. Edmund, but added a third, namely, St.
Thomas of Canterbury, who had been martyred
in the previous year. The young man was further
advised to cast lots as to which of these shrines

io6 SANCTUARIES

he should visit. The lot fell upon Durham, and
on reaching St. Cuthbert's shrine he was cured.
One of the earliest recorded instances of the
violation of sanctuary occurred at Durham, in
connection with a feud among the advisers and
officials of Bishop Walcher in the year 1080.
Rivalry arose between two members of the epis-
copal council, Lyulph and Leobwine, the latter
of whom was a particular friend of Gilbert, the
bishop's nephew. After an open quarrel at a
council meeting, Lyulph was found slain. As
the bishop himself was suspected of complicity
in this crime, he undertook to clear himself by
oath, and an assembly was called at Gateshead.
Lyulph's friends, however, assembled in such
force and adopted so threatening an attitude that
Bishop Walcher, with a few friends, sought safety
in the adjacent church. Another tumult arose,
and in the conflict, the bishop and his nephew
were both put to death by the adherents of
Lyulph. Meanwhile Leobwine, the chief object
of their vengeance, made good his escape and
gained the sanctuary of the church of Durham.
But no respect was paid on this occasion to the
peace of St. Cuthbert. The armed mob it is true
scarcely dared to kill any one by the saint's shrine ;
but they set fire to the church, and on Leobwine
rushing forth to escape the flames, the unhappy
man was impaled on the spears of his adversaries.^

1 Simeon of Durham, i. 116-117; Florence of Worcester, ii.
13-15 ; William of Malmesbury, De GesHs Pontificum, 271.

THE SANCTUARY OF DURHAM 107

The registers of the great priory church of
Durham contain much information with regard
to fugitives for sanctuary during the fifteenth and
sixteenth centuries. The entries relating to this
subject extend from i8th June, 1464, to loth
September, 1524. The words, Peticio Immuni-
tatis, and occasionally the name of the fugitive
are written in the margin. The number of
offenders thus chronicled as seeking refuge num-
ber 332, yielding an average of between five or
six a year. In all probability, however, the actual
numbers were materially greater, and the priory
scribes only made formal entry in cases of some
particular importance, or of those wherein some
doubt as to the legality of sanctuary claim might
arise. In the fifth volume of the registers the
entries seem to be complete ; they number four-
teen for 1 5 17, nine for 15 18, and nineteen for
1 5 19. Homicide or murder very largely pre-
dominated among the crimes or offences herein
enrolled ; they numbered 195, but in a variety
of cases more than one fugitive sought refuge for
the single offence. Thus in 1477, William Rome
and WilHam Nicholson of the parish of " For-
sate " claimed sanctuary for the manslaughter
of one William AUiand. In 1496, three of the
canons of the Premonstratensian abbey of Egle-
stone, together with one of the abbot's servants,
sought refuge on account of the death, after an
interval of twelve days, of a man in an affray in
the parish of Stretford. In 1505, John Apilbe

io8 SANCTUARIES

came to the cathedral church confessing that he
had struck one Christopher Smythson with a
stick on his head, causing his death, and there
came with him Cuthbert Apilbe and two others
who were present and had some share in the dis-
turbance ; it is clear from the entry that more
than one was concerned in Christopher's death,
for in addition to the blow on his head, he was
wounded in the middle of the leg with a pike-
staff, and also shot with an arrow. On 15th
June,i5i8,Robert Massy, of Waverton, Cheshire,
sought sanctuary on account of the death of one
Thomas Mulnesse, a keeper of Huntington Park,
whom he had struck on the head four years pre-
viously with a crab-stick, and with him came
three other men who were his accomplices ; the
keeper died within three weeks of the assault, but
the record ofFers no explanation as to why these
offenders were so long in seeking immunity.
Probably this was a poaching affray, and the cul-
prits had very likely fled to escape punishment,
and on returning to their own district had found
that the crime was not forgotten.

In this register the condition or occupation
of the fugitives is only occasionally mentioned.
In connection with cases of homicide there is a
single entry each, of a knight, an under-bailiff,
an apprentice, a tailor, a plumber, a carpenter,
a tanner, a glover, a shoemaker, a sailor, a ser-
vant, and a baxster or baker ; two are described
as merchants, three as canons, four as gentlemen.

J ^, , ^.^cUcy,i^.L..

A Durham Sanctuary Seeker.

THE SANCTUARY OF DURHAM 109

four as yeomen, four as labourers, and eight as
husbandmen.

In sixteen cases the seekers of sanctuary were
merely in debt, and in fear of indefinite imprison-
ment. The occupation of four of these debtors
is mentioned ; one was a merchant, another a
fletcher or arrow-maker, a horse-libber or gelder,
and the fourth a sheremane or shearer.

Nine of the fugitives had committed the
capital offence of cattle-stealing, and four others
of horse-stealing ; one of the latter is entered as
a yeoman.

Seven pleaded guilty to theft, of whom one
was a chaplain, one a goldsmith, and one a yeo-
man.

There are also entries as to four who gained
sanctuary for house-breaking, and one each for
the offences of rape, being backward in his
accounts, harbouring a thief, and failing to
prosecute.

In the cases of manslaughter or murder, the
instrument which caused the death is for the
most part mentioned. In 56 cases death was
occasioned by a dagger ; in 2 1 cases by a sword ;
in 6 cases by a whynyard or short dagger, and
once by a pugio, which appears to have been
what is now termed a stiletto. Other death-
deahng instruments were a baselard (3) or long
dagger, a bastard-sword (i), a bill (3), a Carhsle
axe (3), a forest-bill (i), a halberd (2), a lance
or spear (16), a pike (13), a Scotch axe (2), a

no SANCTUARIES

Welsh-bill (6), a wood-axe (3), and a wood-knife
(i). As to the exact meaning of the weapons
armicudium, dicker, and egelome, each of which
occur once, there is some doubt. Others were
killed by such weapons as a pot-hook, an iron
fork, a pitch-fork, and by various forms of clubs
and staffs. One was killed by hanging, another
was trodden to death, whilst five were shot with
arrows. In two instances death was caused by
a stone. These Durham entries occasionally
enter into divers particulars, and in the cases of
death, usually allege certain provocations which
frequently, however, only amounted to insults.
Christopher Brown, who sought refuge on Satur-
day, 26th July, 1477, stated that on Wednesday,
during the feast of Saint Wilfrid, when at
Labourn in Coverdale, he insulted one Thomas
Carter who was riding and holding in front of
him his little boy of three years of age ; where-
upon the said Thomas hastily dismounting on
account of the insult, suffered his son to fall on
the ground, and the horse, by an unfortunate
accident, set its feet upon the child who died
within two days from the wounds. Christopher,
recognising that he was the indirect cause of the
child's death, hastened to Durham.

The whole of these Durham entries are in
Latin, with two exceptions. One of these is a
letter testimonial from the prior of Durham ; it
is undated, but was apparently granted in 1492 ;
it runs as follows : —

THE SANCTUARY OF DURHAM iii

"To all Cristen peple thys present writyng
seing or heryng. We John, Prior of the Cathedrall
Churche of Duresme sends gretyng in our Lord
Jesu Christe. And for somuch as it is meritory
& medefuU to testifie the trouth In avoydyng
of all such Inconvences as may falle her uppon,
And in that it is done us to understonnd that
diverse persons of the town of Crosby withinne
the Counte of Carlill, that is to say, Thomas
Atkynson, Henry Atkynson, & Cristofer At-
kynson, er takyn & in dorance haldyn &
for felony gretly troublytt, in especiall for the
deth of one William Skoloke of the towne of
Crosby withinne the same counte, We now
certifiey of veray trowth to your understonndyngs
That one callyd Robert Atkynson of Nethircrosby
hath takyn Immunite & girth in our churche
of Duresme, With all the liberteez pertenyng
therto, confessing & graunting the foresaid
felony & deth of the foresaid William Skoloke
with all the circumstance bilongyng therto,
Afore Dan George Cornforth sacristan of our
sayd churche of Duresme & other honeste
persons as it is contenyd & recordyd in our
registre aforesaid, & for the more credens to
be yeven herin We send unto you the copy of
the Immunite & grith in like forme as it was
takyn and as it is registrid with us In Wittnes
heroof to this our present writyng testimoniall
we sette to," &c.

The other English document is the petition

112 SANCTUARIES

of immunity from Robert Tennant, on 28th
August, 15 19.

" I aske gyrth for Godsake & Saint Cuth-
berte's for savegard of my lyf & for savegard of
my body from imprisonment concernyng suche
danger as I am in enenst my lord of Northum-
berland for declaracion of accomptes, for the
whiche myn answer was to Master Palmys,
Master Stable, Surviar to my said lord, Walter
Wadland, Auditor, William Woune, Gentilman
usher, & other moo of my lordes servanttes that
was send to Ripon to examine me in the presence
of Master Newman, precedent of the Chapitor
of Ripon, that if it wold pleas my lordes good
lordship to lett me have almaner of suche bookes
of myn delyvered to me as belonged to my
charge, so that I myght have them within the
precinct of the privilege that I myght perfyte
them & make them up there. Whiche I wold
doo in as convenient hast as I wuthe possable,
& that done declare accompt within the said
sanctuary. And if it were founde that I were
in any maner of dett to my lord uppon the
determynacion of my accompt, I should uther
content the same, or elles fynd scuritie, or elles
if I wuth fynde no scuirtie I wold submitt me
to my lord, to the whiche M. Survier demanded
of me what tyme & space I wold desire to have
for the perfyting of my bookes. And I answerd
that I wuthe sett noo day but as sone as I possible
myght, for the which cause I aske gyrth for

THE SANCTUARY OF DURHAM 113

Godsake & Saynt Cuthberte's in the presence
of Maister Cuthbert Conyers, Sir Thomas Dow-
son, & John Gierke, et multis aliis, xxvj die
mensis Augusti, Anno Domini Millesimo quin-
centesimo decimo nono. Per me Robertum
Tennant."

Some of these register entries afford infor-
mation as to the customary forms and proceed-
ings in seeking sanctuary at St. Guthbert's shrine.
The following is a translation of a record of
exceptional length : —

" Memorandum, That on 13 May, 1467, one
Golson, of Wolsingham, co. Durham, who had
been detected in theft, and for that reason appre-
hended and lodged in gaol, managed at length
to escape, and fled to the cathedral church of
Durham on account of its immunity of rest.
Whilst standing near the shrine of St. Guthbert,
he prayed that a coroner might be assigned to
him. On the arrival of John Raket, coroner of
the ward of Ghester-le-Street, Golson made con-
fession of his felony, and standing there took his
corporal oath of abjuring the realm of England
with as much dispatch as possible and of never
returning. This oath he took at the shrine of
St. Guthbert before George Gornforth, sacristan
of the cathedral church of Durham, Ralph Bows,
knight and sheriff of co. Durham, John Raket,
Robert Thrylkett, under-sheriff, Hugh Holand,
Nicholas Dixson, and many others. By reason
of which renunciation and oath all Colson's

H

114 SANCTUARIES

accoutrements [ornamenta] were forfeited by right
to the aforesaid sacristan as pertaining to his
office. Therefore Colson was ordered to take
off his clothes to his shirt and to dehver them
to the sacristan for his disposal; and when the
sacristan had received them all, he freely gave
them up and restored to the fugitive all the
clothes which he had up to then been wearing.
After that Colson departed from the church,
and was delivered by the sheriff to the nearest
constables, and so on from constables to con-
stables, holding a white cross made of wood, as
a fugitive, and was thus conducted to the nearest
seaport, there to take ship and never to return."

The entry concludes with the statement that
all this [acta hec) was done on the aforementioned
day, month, and year. This seems to imply
rare expedition, for within a single day Colson
escaped from Durham gaol, gained the shrine of
St. Cuthbert, confessed to the coroner, made the
necessary oaths, complied with the usual for-
malities before the officials of both church and
state, received the white cross of the exiled
sanctuary man, and was handed over by the
sheriff to the constables for immediate trans-
mission to the coast ; it is quite possible that he
was even out of England and on the high seas
within the twenty-four hours.

It was customary to enter the names of two
or three witnesses of the initial proceedings when
immunity was claimed. In general the witnesses

THE SANCTUARY OF DURHAM 115

were Durham men, called in on the spur of the
moment to hear the confession of the fugitive.
Usually one or more of the witnesses were officials
or servants of the great church, though never
ordinary monks. Among them occur the re-
sponsible sacrist, the precentor, the chancellor,
the subprior, the master of the song-school, the
master of the grammar school, the chief apparitor,
the prior's scribe, clerks, literates, and several
merely entered as servants of the church or of
the prior. Chaplains are also mentioned, and
on one occasion a vicar and on another a rector.
Masons occur with some frequency, under the
corrupted Greek form of latamus or stone-cutter.
These would doubtless be the men permanently
engaged on the constantly needed repairs of the
great and extensive fabric. In 1 508 when one
John Gowland sought immunity for breaking into
the house of the vicar of Kilwick in Craven and
stealing money and plate, one of the three wit-
nesses of his confession was Thomas Chalmer, de-
scribed as the master-mason (magister latamoruni) .
Among the general laity who served as wit-
nesses some perhaps casually present or attracted
by curiosity, and others perchance invited for
the purpose were knights, esquires, gentlemen,
notaries public (frequently), and those who fol-
lowed the trades of apothecary {potekar), arrow-
maker, butcher, dyer, glazier, glover, goldsmith,
husbandman, plumber, shoemaker, sievemaker,
smith, slaughterer, and yeoman.

ii6 SANCTUARIES

Now and again, however, it is obvious that
the fugitive was attended by friends or com-
panions from his own district. Thus in a case
of the year 1464, which appears to have been
obviously one of justifiable homicide, William
Hodgson, of Fulford, Yorkshire, who confessed
to killing John Staynton, of the same place, in
self-defence, brought with him a number of
credible witnesses of high standing ; among them
were Henry Preston, life constable of Durham
Castle, Thomas Foster, gentleman, and John
Megre, chaplain. In 1467, the offender, in an-
other case of manslaughter at Newcastle, brought
with him a witness from Gateshead ; he was also
accompanied by Robert Bertram, a notary of
eminence who resided in the North Bailey, Dur-
ham ; these two and another witness are stated
to have been specially requisitioned by the appli-
cant. George Warcop, who sought immunity
in 1509, for manslaughter near Richmond, in
self-defence, was probably a scion of the family
of high standing at Warcop Tower, Westmore-
land ; he was accompanied by Robert Warcop
and Ralph Wyclif, each entered as armiger, and
by Richard ^ j c\ii generosus.

It is not a little remarkable to note that so
long a period elapsed, in several of these Durham
cases, between the commission of the crime and
the seeking of immunity from the ordinary legal
penalties. Such instances of long-deferred action
probably arose either from the working of ,' ,' ,'

THE SANCTUARY OF DURHAM 117

conscience, the instigation of a confessor, or the
coming to hght of some unexpected testimony.
William Migeley, of Horsforth, Yorkshire, in
1505, fled for sanctuary for two reasons; accord-
ing to his confession he had been present at a
murder committed near Halifax in 1498, and he
had afterwards (date not given) stolen twelve oxen
and a cow from the Abbot of Kirkstall, and had
sold them in the Bishopric of Durham. Matthew
Megre, on 6th November, 1 506, sought sanctuary
for the murder of one Robert Robinson at Carlisle
with an axe in the year 1494. In the case of John
Gowland, who committed burglary at Kilwick
Vicarage, as already cited, in 1 506, confession
was not made at Durham until 1508. Henry
Stake, who murdered an unknown man {guendam
extraneiini) with a pitchfork in Shoreditch, Lon-
don, in 1488, allowed twenty-six years to elapse
before he confessed and pleaded for immunity at St.
Cuthbert's, Durham. In two other murder cases
nine and eighteen years had respectively elapsed
before sanctuary-seeking confessions were made.
In the large majority of cases the name of the
parish, together with that of the county or diocese
whence the fugitives came, are duly entered. The
following list of counties, with the numbers per-
taining to each, shows how widespread was the
fame of the sanctuary of St. Cuthbert : —

Chester, 3 Durham, 13

Cumberland, 13 Essex, i

Derby, i Lancashire, 5

ii8 SANCTUARIES

Lincoln, 4 Somerset, i

London, I Surrey, I

Middlesex, i Warwick, 3

Northants, i Westmoreland, 15

Northumberland, 47 Worcester, i

Notts, I Yorkshire, 109

The reasons that caused certain fugitives to
avoid special sanctuaries near to their own homes
or to the scene of the crime have been set forth
in an earher chapter. Several of the Yorkshire
fugitives to Durham lived within a few miles of
Beverley, whose privileges were greater than any
other sanctuary in the kingdom, and one of them
actually came from that very town.

Free access to the shrine of St. Cuthbert was
regarded as a right of high value by the inhabi-
tants of the bishopric, and was included in the
charter of liberties which they obtained from
Bishop Bek. Those who did not desire to be-
come permanent sanctuary men, but who had
gained the refuge of the cathedral church, could
take the oath of abjuring the realm before the
bishop's coroner, and were passed on by him from
constable to constable till they reached the nearest
port. In this there was a difference between
the two great resorts of frithmen, Durham and
Beverley, for the latter ecclesiastical jurisdic-
tion had no coroner and could merely conduct
those desirous of abjuring to the borders of their
sanctuary district, there to find a king's coroner,^

' The question as to the palatine coroner and the royal coroner
is argued at some length in Professor Lapsley's County Palatine of
Durham (1900), pp. 253-5.

THE SANCTUARY OF DURHAM 119

Particulars of much interest with regard to
St, Cuthbert's sanctuary are set forth in a manu-
script usually known as the Rites of Durham,
which was compiled in 1593. It was printed
by the Surtees Society in 1840.

" In the old tyme longe before the house of
Durham was supprest, the Abey Church, and
all the Church yard, and all the circuyte therof,
was a Saunctuarie for all manner of men that had
done or commytted any gret offence, as killing
of a man in his own defence, or any prisoners
had broken out of prison and fled to the said
church dore, and knocking and rapping at yt
to have yt opened, there was certen men that
dyd lie alwaies in two chambers over the said
north church dour, for the same purpose that
when any such offenders dyd come, and knocke,
streight waie they were letten in, at any houre
of the nyght, and dyd rynne streight waie to
the Galleley Bell and tould it, to th' intent any
man that hard it might know that there was
som man that had taken Saunctuarie, And when
the Prior had intelligence therof, then he dyd
send word, and commanding them that they
should keape themselves within the Saunctuarie ;
that is to say within the Church and church-
yard ; and every one of them to have a gowne
of blacke cloth maid with a cross of yeallowe
cloth, called Sancte Cuthbert's cross, sett on his
lefte shoulder of his arme, to th' intent that
every one might se that there was such a prelige

I20 SANCTUARIES

graunted by God and Sancte Cuthbert, for every
such offender to flie unto for succour and safe-
gard of there lyves, unto to such tyme as they
might obteyne their Prince's pardone, and that
thei should he within the Church or Saunctu-
arie in a Grate, which grate ys remayninge
and standing still to this dale, being maid onlie
for the same purpose, standing and adjoining
unto the Gallelei dore on the south syde, and
they had meite, drinke, and bedding, and other
necessaries of the House cost and charg for 37
dales, as was meite for such offenders, unto such
tyme as the Prior and the Covent could gett
them conveyed out of the dioces. This freedom
was confirmed not onely by king Guthred but
also by king Alured."

In the fourteenth volume of the Transactions
of the Bristol and Gloucestershire Archceological
Society (1889—90), an illustrated paper was contri-
buted on " Sanctuary Knockers " wherein it was
claimed that on the doors of several old churches
there remained bronze escutcheons, notably at
Durham, usually representing the head of a lion
or some monster through whose mouth hung a
ring. A claim was set up that these rings were
sanctuary knockers. A highly ingenious but
wholly imaginary explanation of the escutcheon
and ring of St. Nicholas church, Gloucester,
is given : " The head of the fugitive is re-
presented enveloped in his hood, with tongue
protruding and breathless with haste, escaping

THE SANCTUARY OF DURHAM 121

into the church from behind the animal's
head ! "

This article is mainly responsible for the
series of mistakes and blundering assertions which

Durham.

have of recent years been put forth with regard
to alleged " sanctuary knockers."

To begin with, these so-called knockers, with
the possible exception of Durham, are never
genuine knockers, for there is no plate of any
kind on which to knock ; they are merely orna-
mental rings, and are intended, in addition to
being handsome and costly ornaments of the

122

SANCTUARIES

chief entrance to a church, for the prosaic purpose
of closing a heavy door. The name to which
they are entitled is simply that of closing rings.
The most celebrated of these ancient bronze
" knockers " is the singularly handsome example,

Gloucester.

of twelfth-century date, on the north door of the
nave of Durham Cathedral. In this case it is
possible that night fugitives may have used it to
arouse the custodians, as described in the Rites
of Durham. The bronze head measures i ft.
ID in. across from tip to tip of the surrounding
curls. The ring is also of bronze and coeval
with the head.

THE SANCTUARY OF DURHAM 123

The singular late fourteenth-century bronze
" knocker " on the door of the church of St.
Nicholas, Gloucester, with the figure of a double-
headed bat-like beast, is of hexagonal shape, and
measures 1 1 in. from angle to angle.

All Saints, York.

The church of All Saints, Pavement, York,
has a fine example of a circular bronze ring plate,
though the ring itself has been renewed in iron.
There is a similar one on the south door of the
interesting Norman church of Adel, Yorkshire.
Both of these, of late years, have had the name
of " sanctuary knocker " assigned to them, but
it is easy enough to show from coroners' rolls and

124 SANCTUARIES

other records that the York church of All Saints
Pavement had no particular sanctuary virtue
attached to it above any other church of the
city. The same is true of the reputed sanctuary
knocker of St. Gregory's, Norwich, described and
illustrated in a later chapter,^

It is the fashion now^adays, up and down
the country, to give the title of " sanctuary
knocker " to any iron or bronze closing-ring of
fair size on a church door ; and, in ignorance
of the fact that the fugitive was in sanctuary
the moment he set foot in the churchyard, the
inference is generally drawn that he was safe
only in laying hold of this ring.

The most amusing example of one of these
" sanctuary knockers " is one of iron on the
inner vestry door on the south side of the chancel
of the fine church of Hartland, North Devon.
The visitor is assured that the fugitive was not
really safe till he clasped this ring, and to reach
it he had to pass in front of the high altar ! The
fact is there are at least half-a-dozen equally
good closing-rings still extant on North Devon
church doors, notably at West Putford and Little
Torrington, in the immediate neighbourhood of
Hartland.

It is not intended by these remarks to inti-
mate that no fugitive ever when hotly pursued

' On these bronze closing rings, see a good paper by Mr. Miller
Christy, in vol. xxii. of Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries
(1909), wherein special attention is given to an Essex secular example,
now in the British Museum.

THE SANCTUARY OF DURHAM 125

clung to the central closing-rings which would
usually be found on the doors of England's
mediceval churches. Indeed two such cases are
recorded in subsequent chapters (pp. 231, 256) ;
but in neither case was this clinging to the
door-ring of any avail. So great was the general
reverence for sanctuary, that, in the enormous
majority of cases, the fugitive was absolutely safe
as soon as he passed the churchyard gates.

N.B. — There is an interesting though brief account of
Durham Sanctuary rights in the Revd. Dr. Gee's essay
on the Ecclesiastical History of Durham in the Victoria
History of the county, vol. ii. p. 26. An article by Mr.
R. H. Forster on Durham and Other North Country Sanc-
tuaries, which appeared in the Brit. Arch. Assoc. Journal
for 1905, and to which my attention was not directed
until after this chapter was in print, may also be read with
advantage.

CHAPTER VI

THE SANCTUARY OF BEVERLEY

The sanctuary, with its boundaries, founded by Athelstan — The Frith
Stool — Remains of the boundary crosses — Alured of Beverley's
history — St. John of Beverley — Athelstan's visit to Beverley —
The register of sanctuary seekers, their offences and occupations
— Three women fugitives — The instruments of homicide — Two
entries in English — The oath of the sanctuary man — List of
counties whence fugitives came — York episcopal registers —
Town records as to the sanctuary men or Grithmen — Suppression
of this sanctuary under Henry VIII. — Its revival under Queen
Mary.

The special sanctuary rights pertaining to Bever-
ley and its Minster, were amongst the oldest and
most important throughout the kingdom. These
privileges were formally accorded by Athelstan
in A.D. 937, in honour of St. John of Beverley,
whose remains had been here laid to rest some
two centuries before that date. In this case, as
at Durham, Ripon, and elsewhere, security from
pursuit or violence was afforded to all who came
within a certain distance of the actual sanctuary,
and penalties were imposed upon such as should
violate the privilege, increasing in proportion as
the distance lessened. According to the liberties
of St. John of Beverley, the refuge extended from
the minster for about a mile and a half in every

P!"5

Beverley Minster, N.W.

THE SANCTUARY OF BEVERLEY 127

direction.' Within this considerable distance
there were two boundaries, termed the outer and
the second bounds, both of which were marked
by crosses richly carved {nobiliter insculptas).
The third boundary began at the entrance to the
churchyard or precincts, the fourth at the door
into the nave, the fifth at the quire screen, and
the sixth within the actual presbytery, which
included the high altar and the Frith Stool or
stone chair near the altar to which was attached
the greatest possible security. The then heavy
penalty of eight pounds was attached to any
violation of the security of sanctuary between the
outer and second boundaries, whilst between the
second boundary and the entrance to the church-
yard the penalty was doubled. This money fine
was heavily increased by gradations as the east
end of the church was gained, so that the penalty
for seizing a fugitive within the quire was ^{"144.
But if any person broke sanctuary within the
sixth enclosure, his offence was termed bootless
{botalaus), that is, it was an offence which no
payment could redeem, and hence it would
appear that his life was forfeited. Three reasons
were assigned for this extreme penalty ; the con-
tempt thereby shown to the Reserved Sacrament,
the reverence due to the Lord's Table, and more
especially the presence of the precious body of
St. John of Beverley.

1 Leuca or league is the term used ; the Domesday use of the
term is supposed to imply a mile and a half.

128 SANCTUARIES

The stone chair or Frith Stool {Frith peace),
according to Leland, who visited Beverley in the
days of Henry VIII. , used to bear the following
inscription : ^ —

Hczc sedes lapidea Freedstoll dicitur i.e. pads
cathedra, ad quam reus fugiendo perveniens omni-
modam habet securitatem.

No trace of this inscription now remains on
the rude stone chair which is Beverley's most
sacred relic, and which doubtless dates from the
days of Athelstan. Possibly the original inscrip-
tion was not on the chair itself, but on the adjacent
wall. Round the back, however, of the seat,
there are what may be the remains of curious
lettering, though now quite undecipherable, and
they may have been defaced in the days when
the sanctuary was abolished. The chair is 34
in. high, 34^ in. wide, and zz\ in. from front
to back.

As to the old sanctuary crosses, the follow-
ing statement appeared in Poulson's History of
Beverley (1829): —

" Connected with the ' Fridstol ' are the
boundary stones which marked the leuga or cir-
cuit of the sanctuary. There were four of these
crosses originally standing ; three only are now
left ; one in a field adjoining the road to York,
about a mile and a quarter from the church of St.
John, nearly adjoining to Kinwalgraves ; another

' This inscription is also given by Camden, and in the glossaries
of Du Cange and Spelman.

THE SANCTUARY OF BEVERLEY 129

about the same distance from Beverley on the
Walkington road ; and the third in the hedge-

The Frith Stool, Beverley.

row of the road leading to Hessle. The fourth
stone was situated in the valley a little beyond
the hamlet of Molescroft. The first cross was

I

I30 SANCTUARIES

standing in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, and is
referred to in the exemplification of the boun-
daries of the liberties of the town. The top of the
cross, with the transverse stone, is destroyed; what
remains is fixed in a basement stone 3 feet square
and 25 inches thick, 7 inches of the top edge
being cut away. The upright stone is now only
5 feet high, and has a grooved line running down
each of its edges. It bears an inscription engraved
in square text, which is almost effaced by the
storms which have beaten on it from the north.
In 1773, Mr. Topham of Hatfield deciphered
this inscription. He states it to be Orate pro
anim Magistri Willielmi de JValthon, and supposed
it had been erected about the year 1400."

The stumps of the crosses on the Walkington
and Coltingham roads still remain. There are
also about five feet of the cross that used to
bear the inscription to William of Walthon ; he
was canon and archdeacon, and died in 141 o ; he
left ^200 for the east window of the minster.

There is fortunately much on record in con-
nection with the liberties of the great church of
St. John of Beverley in two manuscripts which
are preserved at the British Museum. The first
of these ^ is a record of the various liberties of
the church, with its apostolic and episcopal privi-
leges, which was translated from English (Saxon)

' Harl. MS. 560; printed in 1837 as the 5th vol. of the Surtees
Society. Cott. JVIS. Otho, c. xvi., is an older version, but is much
damaged by fire.

THE SANCTUARY OF BEVERLEY 131

into Latin by Master Alured, the sacrist, who
flourished in the days of Stephen, about the middle
of the twelfth century. The learned Alured, a
native of Beverley, is of some fame as an early
historian of England, but his chronicle is in the
main an epitome of the then recently vi^ritten
Vi^ork of Geoffrey of Monmouth.

A brief preface to his Beverley manuscript
describes Alured as a man of venerated life, a
diligent student of their old muniments, and a
careful transcriber with his own pen of what he
had heard from his predecessors or had himself
witnessed. He deals, in the first instance, with
the antiquity of the church. There seems no
sufficient reason for doubting the assertion of the
Venerable Bede, who was himself ordained by
St. John of Beverley and wrote his biography,
that the church on this spot, was rebuilt by that
saint at the time that he was Archbishop of York,
on a yet older foundation.^ For our own part,
we prefer to accept the concurrent testimony
of eight centuries of writers and of the faithful
of the Church, together with ancient evidence
embodied in the very fabric of the minster, to
nineteenth century critical incredulity, based on

' Mr. A. F. Leach, has given various ingenious reasons, in the
introduction to the Beverley Chapter Act Book, printed by the Surtees
Society in 1897, for believing that Athelstan was the original founder
of the minster and for disbeheving the identity of Bede's " In-
derawuda " with Beverley. With regard to all this criticism. Canon
Nolloth, the vicar of Beverley Minster, shrewdly remarks : " In this,
as well as in certain higher matters, the difficulties of unbelief are
surely greater than the difficulties of faith."

132 SANCTUARIES

the alleged inconsistencies of a few surviving
texts. In the eastern vault of the church now
standing is the old inscription — Beverlacensis
Beati yohannis siibtus in thee a ponuntur ossa, "In
a coffer beneath are laid the bones of the Blessed
John of Beverley " ; whilst round the western
boss of the nave vault was discovered, in 1867,
another inscription — Beverlacensis Johannes Sanc-
tus nobilisime hujus ecclesie Fundator, " St. John of
Beverley, Founder of this most noble church."

John of Beverley, born at Harpham-on-the-
Wolds, some eighteen miles from Beverley, about
640, was educated at Canterbury and Whitby.
He was consecrated Bishop of Hexham in 687,
and is said to have first visited Beverley in 690.
In 706 he was translated to York. Bede assures
us that the saint retired to Beverley in 7 18, there
to end his days, worn out by age, after his resigna-
tion of the archbishopric. He died on 7th May,
721, and was buried in the chapel of St. Peter.^
In 1037, the archbishop was canonised by Pope
Benedict IX., and his remains were translated
from the carved wooden case in which they had
rested, to a far more sumptuous shrine, plated
with gold, and sparkling with precious stones.
A yet more magnificent shrine, on a larger scale,
was procured by the provost and canons towards
the close of the thirteenth century. It doubtless

' The word /or/zVaj, here rendered chapel, has usually been trans-
lated " porch " ; but it most probably means the canopy or baldacchino
of the altar of St. Peter.

THE SANCTUARY OF BEVERLEY 133

rested in the chapel immediately behind the high
altar.

It was the possession of the relics of this
most saintly and learned archbishop which caused
Athelstan, who was crowned in 925, to show such
exceptional respect to the capital of the East
Riding. Alured describes him as amplifying its
possessions, raising its liberties to the highest
pitch, and honouring it with a variety of royal
gifts. When the remains of St. John of Beverley,
which were probably hidden in the evil sacri-
legious days of Henry VIII. and Edward VI.,
were again brought to light during a process
of repairing in 1736, a small dagger was found
with them. This was probably the pledge left
by Athelstan on the altar when he visited this
shrine in 933, to invoke the assistance of St.
John, before the battle of Brunanburgh.^ On
that occasion, he received the banner of the
church of St. John from the hands of the arch-
bishop, and on his return, after the victory,
which made him practically the first king of
all England, Athelstan still further honoured the
church with vessels of gold and silver which
were still in use at the time when Alured wrote.
The king also left before the altar of St. John,
the arms which he had used, namely, his bow,
arrows, quiver, two-handed sword, lance, shield,
cuirass, and helmet. From that time down to

1 See the admirable article on "Beverley and its Minster" by
Rev. Canon Nolloth in Memorials of Old Yorkshire (1909).

134 SANCTUARIES

the Reformation, England's kings, with hardly
an exception, were wont to visit or show
great respect to the venerable minster, and the
shrine of its saint. When the Conqueror was
devastating the wolds and valleys of Yorkshire,
it is said that he broke up his camp, and re-
moved it far away, lest he should " disturb the
peace of St. John." Of Henry IV. it is re-
corded that when worshipping here, he con-
firmed all previous royal charters, and more
especially the sanctuary rights with its Frith
Stool.

After setting out in detail the consecutive
sanctuary bounds of the minster, with the respec-
tive penalties attached thereto, Alured proceeds
to record other details with regard to the fugi-
tives who might here seek for peace or immunity.
Those who had committed homicide, theft or
other offences, as well as those who from any
cause were in danger of death, on coming within
the Beverley bounds, were received there by the
canons or their ministers, with much humanity.
They were allowed to tarry for thirty nights
and days within the sacred precincts. Their
food was provided for them in the refectory,
and they had a bed in the dormitory, or, if they
were persons of any distinction, in a house within
the precincts. During that period it was the
duty of the canons to secure, if possible, peace or
pardon for the fugitive ; but if that could not
be accomplished, at the end of the thirty days

THE SANCTUARY OF BEVERLEY 135

or sooner if it was wished, he was conducted
under safe guard to the outer limits of the sanc-
tuary, there doubtless to meet the coroner and
to undergo the usual process of outlawry in ac-
cordance with the general custom pertaining to
those who gained sanctuary in ordinary churches.
A marked difference between Durham and Bever-
ley was that in the latter case the church authori-
ties permitted no intrusion within the precincts
or town of any coroner, sheriff, or county officer
in sanctuary cases.

An offender who had once been in sanctuary
at Beverley might, according to this twelfth cen-
tury writer, claim the same privileges a second
time, but if he sought refuge a third time he
became a servant of the church for his lifetime
and had always to reside within the Beverley
limits. Alured does not make the question of
the life sanctuary men clear in his digest, but,
from a comparison of various disjointed refer-
ences to Beverley's immunity rights, it appears
that all duly registered fugitives for grave offences,
such as homicide or amputation of limbs, were,
from the earliest period, at liberty to remain for
life on swearing obedience to the minster and
town authorities.

The second manuscript of importance at the
British Museum relative to this sanctuary, is the
register of those fugitives between the years 1478
and 1539 who sought perpetual immunity and
took the oath of obedience to the canons and

136 SANCTUARIES

town authorities.^ This list has sometimes been
mistaken as being a full schedule of the whole
of the fugitives during that period. This, how-
ever, does not appear to have been the case, for
no entries seem to have been made of those
whose offence was pardoned through the inter-
cession of the canons, nor of all those who pre-
ferred to submit themselves to the usual process
of outlawry either immediately or after the lapse
of so many days of residence.

The number of those who took the oath as
sanctuary men during this period was 493, which
yields an average of eight a year during the sixty-
one years covered by the register entries. The
largest number of fugitives came here on account
of debt ; the debtors numbered 208. Those
who took refuge on account of homicide or man-
slaughter were 186 ; for various kinds of felony,
54 ; for coining, 7 ; and one each for horse-
stealing, treason, and receipt of stolen goods.
There were also 35 cases in which the crime or
offence is in no way defined.

The condition or trade of the fugitive is
omitted in upwards of a hundred cases. The
following is a list of those in which it is sup-
plied : Alderman, i ; arrowmakers, 2 ; bakers,
2 ; barbers, 3 ; bedmaker, i ; bowyers, 2 ;
brewers, 3 ; brickmaker, i ; butchers, 43 ;
capper, i ; carriers, 2 ; cartwright, i ; carpenter,
I ; chandlers, 3 ; chapmen, 5 ; clerks, 2 ;

' Harl. MSS. 4292.

^ V

^ 'i

t"' ^"^^

t-f4._.

i i r> V ,'^''*'

■^ .• ^ \ i

""^
'r

"^ I 'JiJ '^ tl

k) ",S

►J
Bi

w
>

m

a

H

O
H

O
H

'V

THE SANCTUARY OF BEVERLEY 137

clothier, i ; cooks, 2 ; coopers, 3 ; cutlers, 3
drapers, 5 ; dyers, 8 ; esquires, 2 ; fishermen
2 ; fishmongers, 3 ; fuller, i ; gentlemen, 16
gentlewoman, i ; glovers, 4 ; goldsmith, i
grocers, 5 ; haberdasher, 2 ; hatmakers, 2
husbandmen, 31 ; labourers, 38 ; literate, i
maltster, i ; mariners, 3 ; masons, 3 ; mercers
1 1 ; merchants, 2 ; millers, 2 ; minstrel, i
painters, 2 ; pewterers, 3 ; physician, i ; pinners

2 ; plumbers, 2 ; pouchmakers, 2 ; purser, i
saddler, i ; Salter, i ; servants, 2 ; shepherd, i
shoemakers, 2 ; shearmen, 3 ; singing man, i
skinners, 2 ; spinsters, 2 ; smiths, 5 ; surgeons

3 ; tailors, 27 ; tanners, 2 ; tapper, i ; tylers

4 ; vintners, 2 ; weavers, 7 ; wheelwrights, 2
woodmonger, 1 ; wool driver, i ; woolman, i
and yeomen, 20.

Six of the gentlemen in this list, as well as
the two esquires, were guilty of murder or man-
slaughter. The Durham list contains no women,
but three appear in the Beverley register. One
of the spinsters, Etheldreda Weler, took refuge
for felony, but the nature of the crime is not men-
tioned. The other spinster, Elizabeth Nelson,
of Pollington, Yorkshire, came to seek the peace
of St. John of Beverley on 12th March, 1509,
for having murdered a certain infant at Hull,
probably her own child. The case of the gentle-
woman was that of an Elizabeth Beaumont, of
Hetton, Yorkshire, who in conjunction with
Robert Beaumont of Almondbury in the same

138 SANCTUARIES

county, literate, confessed on the first Thursday
in October, 1479, at Beverley, to the murder of
Thomas " Alderlay de Almanbery " on the 26th
September.

The instruments of murder or manslaughter
are very seldom named in this Beverley register,
though they are almost alvv^ays given in the
Durham entries of the same period. The reason
for this difference is not far to seek. For the latter
cases procedure was taken before the coroner,
and at such an enquiry or confession, the instru-
ment had to be named, because, according to the
common law of the land, it was deodand or for-
feited to the crown ; but at Beverley, as has been
already remarked, the proceedings were strictly
ecclesiastical. In three consecutive cases which
were registered in the year 1482, it is stated that
the victim had been killed by a stick or club
{baculus). In a few instances, mention is made
of various forms of cutting instruments, such as
daggers, lances, spears, and a sword, whilst in
two cases the victim was done to death with a
pitchfork.

On two or three occasions, the Beverley
entries are made in English, probably in the
absence of the regular scribe, when the entry
was made by some one who dare not trust
himself to Latin. There are two English entries,
both of the year 1491 : —

" Memorandum, that John Spret, of Barton
upon Umber, in the Counte of Lyncoln,

THE SANCTUARY OF BEVERLEY 139

gentilman, com to Beverlay, the ferst day of
October, the . . . yer of the reen of Keing
Herry the vij, and asked the lybertes of Saint
John of Beverlay, for the dethe of John Welton
husbandman, of the same toun, and Ruawleg
hymselff to be at the kyllyng of the saym John
with a dagarth, the xv day of August."

" Thomas Francis, of PuUan in ye Counte
of Norfolk, com to Beverlay, xvij day of
October, the vij year of our sufFerain lord of
Keing Herre the vij, and asked the libertee and
santuare of Saint John of Beverlay, for the
dethe of Thomas Hefflay of Danson of the saym
Counte, and for detts ; and es admytted to ye
libertee."

The oath of one seeking the liberty of St.
John of Beverley was received by the arch-
bishop's bailiff. The clerk of the court made
entry of his description, his residence, and the
place and mode of the crime, and then

" Gar him lay his hand uppon the book,
saying on this wyse.

" Sir, take hede on your oth. Ye shalbe
trew and feythfull to my Lord Archbisshop of
York, Lord of this towne, to the Provest of the
same, to the Chanons of this Chirch, and all
othir ministers therof,

" Also ye shall here gude hert to the Baillie
and xij gouernors of this town, to all burges and
comyners of the same,

" Also ye shall here no poynted wepen.

I40 SANCTUARIES

dagger, knyfe, ne none other wapen, agenst the
Kynges pece.

" Also ye shalbe redy at the obitt of Kyng
Adelstan, at the dirige, and the messe, at suche
tyme as it is done, at the warnyng of the belman
of the towne, and doe your dewte in ryngyng, and
for to offer at the messe on the morne So help
you God and thies holy Evangelistes. And than
gar hym kysse the book."

The sanctuary man then paid the bailiff or
his deputy the fee of 2S. 4d., together with ^d.
to the clerk for inscribing his name in the
register.^

Among the more exceptional cases, the fol-
lowing may be briefly mentioned. John Burnley
of Halifax sought sanctuary on ist January, 1475,
confessing that he was an unlicensed coiner and
had escaped from the king's gaol. On 24th May,
1478, John Boys, of Doram, co. Durham, sought
the peace of St. John of Beverley, for having
occasioned the death of Dominus Baxter, a monk
of Jervaulx abbey, on 12th April at Doram.
In 1504, Richard Spiner, of Catton, tailor, who
had stolen sixteen ells of russet cloth, was im-
prisoned in York gaol, but he broke out and
made good his escape to Beverley. John Lambe,
butcher, of " Parshall " (.? Peppershill), Bucks,
on 8th January, 1532, sought the liberty and
sanctuary of St. John of Beverley, on account
of treason against the body of the Lord King

' Harl. MS. 4292, f. 17b.

THE SANCTUARY OF BEVERLEY 141

and for breaking the king's prison ; he was
duly sworn and admitted as a sanctuary man,
but the entry is erased in the manuscript, doubt-
less on the discovery that under Henry VIII. all
treason was exempted from sanctuary privileges.

The portion of this register selected for
illustration on the accompanying plate, chosen
because of the extra clearness of the writing,
consists of three entries of the year 1478 at
the top of folio 18. In the first of these
William and John Salvan, both esquires, John
Highfeld, gentleman, together with George
Walton and John Hunt, gained sanctuary on
account of having put to death one Henry
Hardewyt. In the second case entry is made
of Robert Bilton, husbandman of Hutton Crans-
wick, taking the customary oath and being
admitted to the peace of St. John of Beverley,
on account of having slain Thomas Matlyn of
the same place. The third case is that of
Robert Alestre, of Nottingham, who was
admitted to permanent sanctuary, owing to his
having killed, at Nottingham, one John Hill,
yeoman of Westminster.

The reasons why fugitives frequently avoided
sanctuaries near at hand to the scene of their
offence, mainly through fear of being intercepted,
have already been discussed. Although the large
majority of sanctuary cases at Beverley came
from Yorkshire, a fair number came hither from
Durham. The fame of this shrine of St. John of

142 SANCTUARIES

Beverley and the comparative ease Mrith which
the life refugees could enter into the town life
were widespread, and brought fugitives from every
part of the kingdom, as appears from the follow-
ing list of the counties from which they came
during the sixty years covered by these extant
registers ; only four English counties are missing.

Anglesey, I
Berks, 3
Bucks, 3
Cambridge, 4
Chester, i
Cumberland, 4
Derby, 13
Devon, 5
Dorset, 2
Durham, 16
Essex, 7
Gloucester, 3
Hants, 3
Herts, I
Hunts, 2
Kent, 4
Lancaster, 6
Leicester, 4
Lincoln, 40
London, 24

Middlesex, 5
Norfolk, 12
Northants, 3
Northumberland, 3
Nottingham, 16
Oxford, 2
Pembroke, I
Rutland, 2
Salop, 3
Somerset, i
Stafford, 2
Suffolk, 8
Surrey, 2
Sussex, I
Warwick, 6
Westmoreland, 2
Wilts, 2
Worcester, 2
Yorkshire, 173

The York episcopal registers contain some
fourteenth century references to Beverley sanc-
tuary cases. A letter of Archbishop Melton to
the provost and canons of Beverley, written on
2 1 St August, 1 33 1, as to sanctuary appears in
the registers of that prelate.^ In his preamble, the

' York Registers, Melton, f. 430.

THE SANCTUARY OF BEVERLEY 143

archbishop recites the ancient privileges granted
to that glorious confessor, the Blessed John of
Beverley, by King Athelstan, whereby any fugi-
tive coming within a mile of the minster or
touching one of the boundary crosses was free
from any legal process, under pain of the greater
excommunication. The archbishop then draws
attention to the case of John Acraman, of Bruges
(? Bridgnorth), who took sanctuary there for
killing Sir John Nele, knight, at Coventry, as
well as for other crimes and felonies which he
expressly confessed to having committed at Nor-
wich. He was admitted as a permanent grith-
man after the customary use, but on Wednesday
next after the feast of St. James, he had been
carried out by force, after nightfall, in spite of
his protests. Those who had committed this
outrage on the peace of the Blessed John, and
those conniving at it, had incurred the penalty
of excommunication, and the archbishop called
upon the canons to see that John Acraman was
brought back to Beverley to enjoy the chartered
immunity, or the violators of sanctuary would
be punished with a rod of iron.

On nth January, 1322, the archbishop wrote
to the steward of the provost of Beverley in
strenuous terms as to Simon de Beltoft, Thomas
de Parys of Sneinton, and Thomas de Parys of
Mexborough, who had claimed immunity, made
their confessions, and been duly admitted to sanc-
tuary. Information had reached the archbishop

144 SANCTUARIES

that these three men had been by force removed
from sanctuary, and he charged the provost if this
breach of sanctuary had been in any way his
doing or with his sanction, instantly to revoke
his action and to cause these men to be replaced
within the asylum of the church. A similar
missive was sent on the same day to the canons
of Beverley.

The records of the town of Beverley yield
interesting fragments of information with regard
to the condition and standing of the sanctuary
men or frithmen who had taken up their life
residence within the immunity bounds.^ They
were evidently allowed to reside where they
pleased, and were at liberty to follow their own
craft or trade, and even to be members and
officials of the trades gilds. Although by becom-
ing sanctuary men they forfeited to the crown all
their possessions, real or personal, the friends or
relatives of many of them would doubtless supply
funds or advance money to enable them to start
in business.

In the book which deals with the Ancient
Customs and Liberties of Beverley, there is a
long Nota de Grithmen of the time of Henry VI.,
of which the following is a translation : —

" The community of the town of Beverley
gathered together in the Gild Hall, Tuesday,
1 6th March, 1429, to consider a letter sent to

' Historical MSS. Commission Report on the MSS. of the Cor-
poration of Beverley (1900).

THE SANCTUARY OF BEVERLEY 145

the twelve keepers or governors of the town of
Beverley undernamed, in the name of Sir Henry
Brounflet, knight, and Master John Ellyecarr, the
purport of which letter was this : That for the
respect due to their worships, and at their suppli-
cation, the twelve keepers should admit William
Gelle, fisherman (' fisscher '), and make him a
burgess. This being shewn to the community,
they with one consent said that the said William
Gelle is a Grithman, and inasmuch as it was
ordered and decreed before the said day that they
should not for the future make any Grithman a
burgess, therefore he cannot be admitted to that
liberty nor any other Grithman for ever. And
it was ordered and decreed the same day and year
that no burgess of the town of Beverley who is
a Grithman shall for the future, to the offence of
the common people, or against the peace of our
Lord the King, carry on him any knife or dagger
{dagariiini) except with a blunted point, nor a club
{baculuni) nor short sword {baselardum) within the
town of Beverley, on pain of forfeiture of the
same to the Lord Archbishop, and forfeiture of
his burgess-ship to the community of the town
of Beverley for ever. And that these ordinances
and constitutions may have perpetual force they
were ratified and confirmed by Roger RoUyston,
and eleven others, the twelve keepers or governors
of the community of the town on the day and
year aforesaid, with the assent of the aldermen
and stewards of all the crafts {artium) of the

K

146 SANCTUARIES

aforesaid town and of all the co-burgesses there
present."

In 1447 certain ordinances were made as to
grithmen's payments if practising a craft. Among
certain orders made on 25th April, 1460, it was
ordered and decreed that no grithman should
hereafter be a burgess, even though he held a
royal charter. This expression appears to refer
to the full pardon occasionally granted by the
crown to a sanctuary man, and it may fairly be
assumed that the position of a Beverley grith-
man was sometimes so successfully established
that he did not desire to quit the town although
the pardon gave him full liberty to depart.

A long and important agreement was drawn
up in November, 1536, between Edward Lee,
Archbishop of York, and Lord of Beverley. The
last clause but one relates to the grithmen, and
runs as follows : —

" And moreover the said Lord Archebushoppe
haithe graunted to the said burgesses and their
successorers, that the sanctuarie men comeng to
the said towne of Beverlaie, occupienge anye
crafte or misterie there, shall pay unto the up-
holding of castell and clotheng and oother things
for the upholding of the craft or misterie as
oother men occupienge the said craft or misterie
paye."

After this concordat a new form of oath
was imposed on admission to burgess-ship. The
following was the opening phrase : —

THE SANCTUARY OF BEVERLEY 147

" Thys swer I that I am fre and no gyrth-
man."

The following orders of the trades gilds of the
town make direct reference to the sanctuary men.
The gild ordinances of the Butchers, in use in
1365, prescribe "that every butcher aforesaid
who is grithman, and is not able to be a burgess,
though willing to be, shall pay yearly as long
as he follows (' occupaverit ') the same craft for
the common expenses of the craft aforesaid to
the Alderman, lad., to be paid without delay."
This order is repeated in the later English
version of 141 6.

The statutes of the Cordwainers, under date
of 2nd March, 1468, enact that "every new
master is to lift up his hand to the Alderman
that he will be obedient, and to pay 3s., or if he
be a grithman lad."

The Act 32 Henry VIII. extinguished all
special rights of sanctuary, such as those of
Beverley and Durham. The Beverley special
register, therefore, came to an end in i 540. The
two last folios, however, of this valuable book,
contain a number of highly interesting later
entries of a brief description. From these it is
clear that an effort was made soon after the
accession of the boy-king, Edward VI., to re-
establish the ancient privileges which had gone
on uninterruptedly for six centuries. These later
entries record simply the name and occasion-
ally the occupation of the would-be grithman.

148 SANCTUARIES

or fugitive, with the year, and in one or two
instances the day of the month appended. The
Act of I 540, as has been already said, permitted
the ordinary use of churches and churchyards as
sanctuaries, except in a number of more serious
crimes ; but these Beverley refugees of a later
date were obviously not of that character, for
each name is followed by the abbreviated word
jur, implying that the applicant for immunity
took the official oath of Beverley. On the 6th
August, 1548, one Hugo Tailler was sworn as a
fugitive. There are several other names entered
of that year as well as of 1549. This attempt to
revive the old use seems then to have been sup-
pressed. The next entries begin in 1553, when
there were no fewer than twenty of such cases
sworn. It will be remembered that Mary came
to the throne in July, 1553, and so far as we can
ascertain, the authorities at Beverley at once re-
stored the custom which regulated the admission
of the grithmen. The Queen's restoration of the
old immunities to Westminster Abbey is well
known, and dealt with elsewhere. The total
number of these later sworn fugitives herein
enrolled come to the large total of 210. It may
be accepted with certainty that the privilege con-
tinued, and fugitives from time to time applied
up to the date of Queen Mary's death on 17th
November, 1558 ; but the last names which
appear in this register are of three who reached
Beverley in 1557. They are thus entered : —

THE SANCTUARY OF BEVERLEY 149

Simon Allen . . .28 Junij, 1557.
Robt. Shawe . . -31 January, 1557 (8).
Ric. Viells . . ■ vij February, 1557 (8).i

In no single case of these later applications
for immunity is the crime or alleged offence of
the applicant named ; but in about eighty in-
stances the occupation of the fugitive is stated.
They include four barbers, a brewer, seven
butchers, a candlemaker, three carpenters, a
chaplain, a cook, two curriers, four drapers, two
dyers, one farmer, two fishermen, two fullers, two
gentlemen, three glovers, one goldsmith, one hard-
wareman, three labourers, two merchants, four
millers, one pewdarrer (pewterer), two potters, a
saddler, three smiths, a spurrier (a maker of spurs),
six tailors, six tanners, one tiler, one victualler, one
waterman, three weavers, and two wrights.

■^ These three names, together with two of 1555, are crowded in
at the bottom off. 34''. No room is left anywhere in this parchment
register for the entry of any further names.

CHAPTER VII

OTHER NORTHERN SANCTUARIES

York and Southwell — The Priory of Hexham — The Collegiate Church
of Ripon — The Priory of Tynemouth — The Priory of Wetherhal
— The Priory of Armathwaite — The Church of Norham.

THE MINSTERS OF YORK AND SOUTHWELL

In the White Book or I^iber Albus of Southwell

minster is the copy of a letter from the Chapter

of York to the Chapter of Southwell, stating the

customs of York minster, as found at an inquest

of the year 1106. In that year when Osbert

was Sheriff of Yorkshire, he wished to deprive

the church of York and the whole archbishopric

of all the good customs which they anciently

had. But Archbishop Girard complained to the

king, and he sent Robert, Bishop of Lincoln,

and four others to inquire at York what were

the customs of the church of the Blessed Peter.

They, having convoked the shire moot, charged

the wisest English of the city by the faith they

owed the king to find a verdict concerning these

customs. The verdict of Ulvet son of Forno,

by hereditary right lawman or lawgiver of the

city, in conjunction with eleven other jurors, set

forth the customs and liberties in detail anciently

150

►4

m
S

H

o

NORTHERN SANCTUARIES 151

given by King Athelstan, reverently kept by his
successors, and confirmed by papal decrees. The
following were the declarations of the jurors with
regard to sanctuary : —

" Any one who seizes any one of whatever
crime guilty or convicted within the close [infra
arctum eccksie), and does not surrender him, shall
pay six hundreth, if in the church twelve hun-
dreth, in the quire eighteen hundreth, and do
penance as for sacrilege. A hundreth is six
pounds. 1 But if any one, agitated by a mad
spirit, with devilish audacity presume to seize
any one in the stone chair near the altar, which
the English call ' Fritstol,' that is the chair of
quiet or peace, for so atrocious a sacrilege amends
are within the competence of no court, and by
no tale of money can be closed, but among the
English he is called boteless. . . . These fines
belong not to the archbishop but to the canons.
... If a homicide or thief or criminal or outlaw
fly to the church for defence of life or limb, he
shall be in peace there thirty days. If within that
time he cannot make peace with those he has
wronged, the clerks shall be able to take him up
to thirty leagues {leugas) wherever he likes with
some sign (cross) of the Church's peace and
relics, and any one who breaks the peace on
them within the said space shall be guilty of
breaking the Church's peace, namely of one
hundreth ; and in this way they shall be able to

1 Elsewhere, the hundreth is said to equal eight pounds.

152 SANCTUARIES

conduct him and to bring him back three times.
Any one coming to the Church, wishing to
Hve in peace there rather than to dwell among
criminals, by the custom of the Church shall be
in peace there for as long as he will. If any one
for urgent cause wishes to depart, he shall be
able to go in peace, under conduct of the canons,
with the sign of the Church's peace to a neigh-
bouring church having like privilege, to wit the
churches of Blessed John of Beverley, Blessed
Wilfrid of Ripon, Blessed Cuthbert of Durham,
and St. Andrew of Hexham. They have similar
fines for breach of peace."

Particulars follow as to the mile {niiliare ununi)
sanctuaries of Beverley and Ripon as founded by
Athelstan.

" Moreover at the three feasts^ and at Pente-
cost all coming and going from their homes have
peace, and if any one break that peace, penalty
of one hundreth. Similarly at the feasts of St.
John Baptist and of Blessed John the Confessor,
and the dedication of the church of Beverley,
and on the two feasts of St. Wilfrid at Ripon." ^

It appears from the Quo Warranto proceed-
ings, 3 to 5 Edward III., that up to that time
Southwell had no separate charter, but merely
general charters granting that minster like privi-
leges with the church of York ; but after these

^ Probably of St. Peter in Cathedra, 22nd Feb, ; St. Peter the
Apostle, 29th June ; and St. Peter ad Vincula, ist Aug.

^ Leach's Visitations and Memorials of Southwell Mi)ister, pp.
190-5.

NORTHERN SANCTUARIES 153

proceedings had resulted favourably to Southwell
a special charter was granted by the king, reciting
the proceedings and confirming the established
privileges.^

So far as we are aware, there are no special
records extant of sanctuary cases either at York
or Southwell.

THE PRIORY OF HEXHAM

St. Wilfrid, who was born in Northumbria
in the year 634, and who died in 709, made so
great a mark upon his age, that it seems unlikely
that his memory can ever fade away. In his
native district, not only do some five and forty
churches bear his dedication, but the name of
Wilfrid has passed into the strictly limited stock
of non-biblical Christian names which are still in
fairly common use among the peasantry of West-
moreland and Yorkshire, and to a limited extent,
in several counties farther south. It is not neces-
sary to give here any account of his somewhat
complicated history, or of the unfaltering devotion
of this devout prelate to his ideal of Roman unity
and Roman supremacy. To him we owe the
foundation of his earliest and best-loved monas-
tery at Ripon, and only second in importance
to that foundation was the great church of some-
what later date at Hexham. His chief delight,
throughout his long and chequered career, was the

^ Placita de Quo Warranto (Rec. Com.), pp. 615, 636, 648.

154 SANCTUARIES

building and beautifying of churches, and doing
all in his power to enhance their sanctity.

There seems to be little or no doubt that the
privilege of sanctuary possessed by Hexham was
acquired for that church and its surroundings by
Wilfrid himself. If this was the case, Hexham
seems to have been the first of the great minsters
to possess this power of prolonged immunity for
transgressors ; for the four chief churches of the
diocese of York, as is subsequently shown, did not
attain to their exceptionl sanctuary rights until
the days of Athelstan in the tenth century.

The history of the founding of the church of
Hexham, and of the early bishops of that place,
was written by Richard, who was prior of Hex-
ham about the middle of the twelfth century ;
his history ends with the year 1 1 54.^ Two chap-
ters of this book are specially concerned with the
sanctuary rights. He therein tells us in distinct
terms that these privileges were obtained by St.
Wilfrid through his influence with the Roman
See, and that they were confirmed by a variety of
archbishops and bishops, as well as by kings and
princes, both of Scotland and England, down to
the days in which he wrote. Not only were
criminals and fugitives protected by this peace
of Hexham, but it also served to preserve num-
bers of others, both in life and substance, from

^ The best edition of Prior Richard's History of Hexham and his
Acts of King Stephen are to be found in the Memorials of Hexham
issued by the Surtees Society in 1864-5.

NORTHERN SANCTUARIES 155

the terrors of invading armies and forays from
Scotland.

After describing these immunities in general
terms, Prior Richard, in the last chapter of the
second part, deals more definitely with its pre-
cise extent. As at Beverley and the other York-
shire minsters, there were six degrees of safety.
The outermost cordon was at a distance of about
a mile from the town, and the boundaries were
marked by four crosses, which were then stand-
ing, without the town of Hexham. The penalty
for violating sanctuary after these crosses had
been reached or passed was _^i6 ; within the
town, ;^32 ; within the walls of the precincts
of the church, £/^S ; within the church itself,
,^96 ; and within the gates of the quire, £14.^.
These figures are based upon Richard's reckon-
ing, that the hundreth equalled ^TS. But if any
one was possessed of a sufficiently diabolical spirit
to attempt to arrest any one in the stone chair
by the side of the altar, quem angli vacant fridstol,
no pecuniary penalty could compensate for the
outrage, for it was botolos, i.e. bootless to be
attempted, and the actual penalty is left to the
imagination.

The prior quotes these limits, and the penal-
ties attached to each, from a charter of immunity
granted to York Cathedral and to the other great
minsters connected with the See by Henry I.,
confirmatory of ones of earlier date. This
document is more particularly mentioned under

156 SANCTUARIES

Southwell. The prior goes on to state that during
the rule of Thurstan, who held the archbishopric
of York from 1 1 19 to 1 140, there were two occa-
sions when, in the sight and audience of many
wise and noble men, the archbishop directed that
the outer sanctuary bound on the north was to
be reckoned from the centre of the river Tyne.
The first of these occurred when a certain man
was escaping from Hudard, the sheriff, who held
office between 11 13 and 1 131, and the second
when another was flying from the custody of
Bernard de Balliol, lord of Bywell, a vill imme-
diately to the east of Hexham. In both cases
the fugitives appear to have been debtors caught
whilst crossing the river ; the archbishop's power
was sufficient to secure not only the restoration
to Hexham sanctuary of the persons of these
two men, but also of the goods they were carry-
ing. The prior further adds that boundary
crosses were then erected on the margin of the
river, as it was found impossible, owing to
frequent floods, to fix them in the centre of the
water.

The same author, in his Acts of King
Stephen, whilst detailing the events of the year
1 138, says that King David of Scotland and
his son both confirmed to Hexham its full
rights of sanctuary, as founded by the Blessed
Wilfrid, with the special object that in times
of war and discord it might be a perfectly safe
refuge {tutissimum asilum) for any member of

By Ralph Hedley, R.B.A.

Sanctuary.
(The Hexham Frith Stool.)

NORTHERN SANCTUARIES 157

either poor or rich who might there preserve
not only their Hves, but also their goods.

As to the Hexham sanctuary crosses, Mr.
Fairless, a local antiquary, described, in 1863, a
considerable fragment of the cross that stood due
east as preserved on the premises of the Union
Workhouse. To the direct west of the church,
he mentions a spot of ground known by the name
of the Maiden Cross, which was supposed to be
the site of the cross in that direction on the road
to Carlisle. Nothing was known of the cross to
the south, but the stump or socket of a cross was
standing in a field due north on the Alnwick
road, by the side of a bank known as Cross Bank.
This last, however, was about two and a half
miles from Hexham. It therefore follows that
none of these remains of crosses could have had
any connection with sanctuary, for the distances
are all wrong, unless we are to believe that they
had one and all been moved. ^

But if there is every reason to be sceptical as
to the supposed remnants of the crosses set up by
St. Wilfrid to mark the boundaries of the peace
of Hexham, there need be no doubt as to the
genuineness of that far more important and price-
less relic, the Chair of Peace, still extant within
the walls of the abbey church. The celebrated
Frithstool of Hexham was probably the actual

^ See Memorials of Hexham (Surtees Society), i. 60-1 ; also
Wright's History of Hexham (1823), 17. The Ne%v History of North-
umberland {iZ^jo), iii. 242, only repeats previous conjectures as to the
possible remains of the ancient crosses.

158

SANCTUARIES

bishop's chair, the cathedra of the Saxon church,
and used as such by St. Wilfrid at the time when
he was Bishop of Hexham. The block out of
which this ancient seat has been hewn is of a
close grit-stone measuring 2 ft. 7^ in. in length.

The Frith Stool of Hexham.

I ft. 9 in. in width, and i ft. 10 in. in height.
The surface of each of the arms is decorated by
an interlaced scroll, having at the end a three-
fold knot. The rest of the ornament consists
of incised parallel lines. The original base has
gone ; it is now raised on three stones of some-
what coarser material. The chair, as Mr. Hodges
points out, has a distinctively classical feeling in

NORTHERN SANCTUARIES 159

its design, and the Bishop of Bristol has suggested
that it was modelled after some similar chair
which St. Wilfrid had seen when at Rome. It is
somewhat peculiar that the triquetra knots in the
ornamentation of the arms are not joined to the
bands, but are quite independent of them. This
most venerable stone seat, the oldest episcopal
stool in England, possibly in Christendom, has
been repeatedly moved about, and shamelessly
treated by its guardians in comparatively modern
days. In 1830, the frithstool was taken away
from near the high altar where it had stood in
medieval days and placed in the north aisle behind
Prior Leschman's chantry. There it stood until
1859, when it was again translated into the aisle
of the south transept ; the moving was accom-
plished with such crass carelessness that the
moulding under the seat was destroyed, and the
seat itself actually broken into two pieces. It
was moved yet again in 1872, and, for a fourth
time in the nineteenth century, in 1885.^ The
last move of all has probably brought it nearly
to its true medieval position.

The references that survive as to those who
fled to the peace of Hexham are not numerous,
but several occur in the Northumberland assize
roll of 1256. Richard the son of Gamel, attempt-
ing to outrage Alice, the daughter of Ivo de la
Dene, in the field of Langley, was struck by her
with quodam parvo kynpulo so that he died within

1 Hexham Abbey, G. C. Hodges (if

i6o SANCTUARIES

a month. Alice immediately fled to the peace of
Hexham. The jury held that the wound was in-
flicted by Alice in self-defence. Ivo, her father,
offered the crown 40s. and two sureties so that
Alice might be able to return. Adam de Hare-
stanesden, and John and Walter his sons, struck
Gylemius de Elyrington in the field of Langel,
so that he died within five days. They imme-
diately fled to the liberty of Hexham and were
outlawed. Ralph the smith of Heyden killed
his wife Christina by night, in his house at
Heyden, but escaped to the liberty of Hexham
and was eventually outlawed. His chattels were
valued at 6 is. The vill of Hay den was in mercy
for not taking him, and two men were also in
mercy for a false appraisement of his chattels.
A curious case is registered on the same roll of
a Scotchman killing an Englishman actually in
Hexham ; the murderer made no claim to sanc-
tury in the town, but escaped to Scotland. The
town was declared in mercy for not taking him.
It is added that " the bailiffs of that liberty do
not permit coroners or sheriffs to enter."

Up to the very eve of the dissolution of the
monasteries, Hexham was resorted to as a sanc-
tuary by the Borderers, and was a special means
of assuaging the fierceness of international raids.
Edward Lee, Archbishop of York, gave the
house a good character in a letter written to
Cromwell in April, 1536, wherein he pleaded
strongly, but of course in vain, that the two

NORTHERN SANCTUARIES i6i

houses of Hexham and St. Oswald, Gloucester-
shire, both in the archbishop's patronage, might
be spared out of the general ruin. Of Hexham,
he wrote : —

" It was some time sedes episcopalis, and many-
holy men, sometime bishops there, be buried in
that church, saints by name ; and wise men that
know the Border think that the lands thereof,
although they were ten times as much, cannot
countervail the damage that is like to ensue if
it be suppressed, and some way there is never
a house between Scotland and the lordship of
Hexham ; and men fear if the monastery go down,
that in process of time all shall be waste much
within the land. And what comfort that mon-
asteries is daily to the country there, and speci-
ally in time of war, not only the country men
do know, but also many of the noble men of this
realm that have done the King's Highness service
in Scotland. ... I entirely pray you, if you
think that I have reason to sue for these two,
that you will help me to save them. And as
for Hexham, I think it is necessary to be con-
sidered, as I think they that know the borders
will say."^

At one time an early cross of much beauty,
standing in the grounds of the Spital, Hexham,
used to be pointed out as one of the grith crosses.
It bears the Rood on the front side, whilst on the
back and sides are beautiful designed scrolls of

1 Cott. MSS., Cleopatra, E. iv. 239.

l62

SANCTUARIES

grapes and tendrils. It is of course possible
that this may have been a grith cross at the
entrance of the town or church precincts ; but
the best opinions pronounce it to be a memorial
cross, and it has even been conjectured that it

~^^r^-

Early Cross. The Spital, Hexham.

wras erected to the memory of Acca, who suc-
ceeded Wilfrid in the bishopric of Hexham and
whose death occurred in 740.

THE COLLEGIATE CHURCH OF RIPON

With regard to the great collegiate church of
St. Wilfrid of Ripon, it is stated that Athelstan

NORTHERN SANCTUARIES 163

conferred sanctuary rights on the minster and
place at the time that he came there with his
army, giving Ripon the same Hberties as he had
given to the church of Beverley. Athelstan
came with his army into Northumbria at least
twice, namely in 926 when he brought into
subjection Ealdulf of Bamburgh, and again in
937 after the battle of Brunanburgh ; the visit to
Ripon was probably on the last of these occasions.
An early English thirteenth century metrical
version of Athelstan's charter to the church of
Ripon runs as follows : —

Wyt all that es and es gan
Yat ik King Adelstan
As gyven als frelich as I may
And to ye capitell of seint Wilfrai,
Of my free devotion
Yair pees at Rippon
On ilke side ye kyrke a mile,
For all ill deedes and ilke agyle,
And within yair kirke yate
At ye Stan yat Grithstoh hate.
Within ye kirke dore and ye quare
Yair have pees for les and mare,
Ilkan of yis stedes sal have pees
Oi frodmortell and il deedes
Yat yair don is, tol and tem,
With iren and vi^ith water deme
And yat ye land of sent Wilfrai
Of altyn geld fre sal be ay.^

The only definite reference to sanctuary in
the extant Chapter Act Book of Ripon,' which

* Birch's Cartulariwn Saxonicum, ii. 325.
^ Printed by the Surtees Society in 1875.

1 64 - SANCTUARIES

covers the period from 1452 to 1506, occurs
under date of 12th May, 1458. Six girthmen
or grithmen {confugce sive gyrthmanii), Thomas
Plumer of Bandgate, Robert Morton ahas Herry-
son, slaughterer, of Westgate, Henry Jonson of
Bloxumgate, Edmund Skaythlok, John Skayth-
lok, and William Topshawe of Ripon, were
cited to appear before the chapter to show if
there were any reasonable causes why they should
not be canonically punished for perjury inasmuch
as they had failed to observe their oath. The
oath would doubtless be on similar lines to that
already given under Beverley, and involved ab-
solute obedience to the ecclesiastical authorities.
Three of the grithmen made excuses. Thomas
said that he had been carrying a rod (rodd) all
the Rogation days except Monday. Robert said
that he had not dared to go out of his house to
carry a rod before the procession on the said
days, for fear of imprisonment at the hands of
his creditors. This explanation was not held to
avail, for on those days grithmen were immune
from all vexation. William, to avoid punish-
ment, stated that he was ready to join the
procession if the choir had gone out of the
church according to their usual way. William le
Scrop, the president, and the residentiary canons
were not able to accept the excuses for their
disobedience, and the three who pleaded were
condemned to receive four scourgings with their
rods before the procession on the four feasts of

RiPON Minster.
(From a print, 1790.)

NORTHERN SANCTUARIES 165

Pentecost, Holy Trinity, Corpus Christi, and
the nativity of Wilfrid (i 2th Oct.), but were then
of grace excused all save the scourging on the
feast of St. Wilfrid. The other three did not
appear, and were suspended. Afterwards Henry
appeared, and in his case it was determined that
he for his offence and contumacy should be
scourged with his own rod once on the festival
of Corpus Christi, and once on the festival of
St. Wilfrid, the other two scourgings being
pardoned. Edmund was summoned again for
the vigil of Pentecost, and on his not appearing
was excommunicated. Afterwards he appeared
and was condemned to three scourgings for his
offence and contumacy. John, the sixth grith-
man, was pardoned, because he was old and weak
in intellect.

As to the supposed boundary crosses of this
sanctuary, a cross stood on the road between
Ripon and Nunwick, by a field still called
Athelstane Close. The stump of " Archangel "
or "Kangel" cross was sunk in the hedge of a
lane leading from the canal bridge to Bondgate,
and the base and stump of Sharow cross still
remain on the Sharow Road. Another cross
stood at Bishopton. At the end of the thir-
teenth century there were eight of these mile-
crosses, marking the Leuga S. Wilfridi mentioned
in Domesday.^

1 Walbran's Ripon, 12th ed., p. 30. See also Gent's History oj
Ripon (i733)>P- io°-

1 66 SANCTUARIES

THE PRIORY OF TYNEMOUTH

Founded upon a lofty rock projecting boldly
into the sea, at the mouth of the Tyne, which
here divides the counties of Northumberland
and Durham, stood the once famous priory
church of the Blessed Mary and St. Oswin
King and Martyr. It was the premier cell
of the premier English house of Benedictine
monks, the abbey of St. Albans. The old
monastery on this site, ravaged by the Danes,
and long left desolate, was refounded in 1065,
when the remains of St. Oswin, treacherously
slain in 651, are said to have been miracu-
lously discovered. Monks from St. Albans
were installed there in 1090. Before the close
of the thirteenth century, the prior of Tyne-
mouth came into remarkably extensive privi-
leges throughout his liberties. He appointed
his own justices and coroner, and he had at
Tynemouth a prison, together with gallows,
tumbrel, and pillory.^ The right of sanctuary
was held by the priory from an early period, the
precise date of which has not been ascertained.
Tynemouth had its special peace or grith, with
outer boundaries like Hexham and other memo-
rable minster churches of the north of England.
These boundaries probably extended for a mile

' See Mr. Crastei^'s Parish of Tynemoidh (1907), forming vol. viii.
of the new History of Northumberland ; also Gibson's two fine
volumes on this priory, published in 1846.

NORTHERN SANCTUARIES 167

inland, and would be marked by crosses on the
approaching roads. Mr. Craster says : " It is
not impossible that the Monks' Stone, near the
junction of the roads lead- _

ing from Tynemouth to
Whitby and to Monk-
seaton is a memorial cross
removedfrom the Anglian
cemetery to serve in post-
Conquest times as a grith-
cross."

It seems clear that the
peace of Tynemouth, like
those of Hexham and
Durham, and of the four
great minsters of York
diocese, was of pre-Con-
quest foundation, and was
established here long be-
fore the renewal of the
monastery in 1063. Ac-
cording to the ancient life
of St. Oswin,^ written
by an anonymous
monk at the be-
ginning of the
twelfth century,
that saint of the
seventh century, the last king of Deira, was buried

The Monks' Stone, Tynemouth.

1 Vita Oswini, Cott. MSS., Julius, A. x. ; printed by the Surtees
Society in 1838.

i68 SANCTUARIES

at Tynemouth, and it is implied there and else-
where that special sanctuary rights pertained to
the Anglian abbey erected on the headland some
time prior to the eighth century. The life
records, in chapter xlii., the escape of certain
prisoners from the gaol of Newcastle, and their
gaining safety at Tynemouth owing to the
miraculous intervention of St. Oswin.

Although no register of Tynemouth's frith-
men or grithmen has come down to our time,
as in the cases of Durham and Beverley, the
intermittent evidence as to their permanent
residence within the sanctuary bounds is fairly
frequent from the time when the priory came
into the hands of the monks of St. Albans.

In 1 294 the abbot of St. Albans and the prior
of Tynemouth were both summoned to show by
what warrant they claimed to receive all felons
coming infra grithcros de Tynemuth}

A highly interesting undated letter is extant
among the Digby Codices of the Bodleian from
the mayor and good men of Newcastle to the prior
of Tynemouth, begging him to allow one Thomas
de Carlisle, a burgess of their town, for whom
they had great regard and esteem, to remain
peaceably in his hired house in Tynemouth. The
corporation bore testimony to his general good
fame and probity, but he had been guilty of a
personal assault.

By writ of Edward III., in 1342, Edward

^ Quo Warra?ito Rolls, p. 593.

NORTHERN SANCTUARIES 169

de Baliol, king of Scotland, was empowered to
array and take into his retinue all grithmen who
on account of felony had taken sanctuary at Tyne-
mouth, and were willing to serve the king of
Scotland in his army at their own expense, on
condition of a pardon being granted them.^

In 1523, a Durham criminal took refuge at
Tynemouth, whereupon Cardinal Wolsey, then
Bishop of Durham, wrote the following letter to
Lord Dacre, Warden of the Marches, asking for
the delivery of the malefactor for punishment : —

" My Lorde, I commaunde me herteley unto
you. And wher of late an heynous murdre was
committed at Shareston, within my bishoprikke
of Duresme, by one Robert Lambert, Richard
Littlefare, William Turnour, Robert Johnson and
others, which murdred one Cristofer RadclifF,
and after the same murder committed the said
R. Lambert fledd unto the priorie of Tynemouthe
for refuge and sanctuarie, and there as yet re-
maineth : I wille and desire you that by all
means and politique wayes, which ye can
devise, ye endeavour yourself with diligence
for thapprehending and taking as welle of the
said Robert as of thother malefactors, whiche
goe abrode within that my bishoprike as yet un-
punished. And after that ye have taken theim,
or any of theim, to be delyvered into the hands
of Sir William Bonham, Knyght, my Sheref there

' Rot. Scotia, 16 Edw. III., m. 12.

I/O SANCTUARIES

in his keaping to remayn until such time as they
may be ordred the Kinges lawes, and receyve
punishement according to their demerites. . . .
From my place at Westminster, the I2th day of
June. Your loving frende,

"T. Card" Eborum."'

The result is not known, but probably Prior
John Stonewall, who then ruled the priory of
Tynemouth, was bold enough to protect Lam-
bert.

Particulars can be readily gleaned as to the
more ordinary use of this ancient sanctuary,
whereby, after confession before the prior's
coroner, the fugitive was called upon to abjure
the realm.

One of the earliest references to the exercise
of these usual sanctuary rights at Tynemouth
occurred in the days of William Rufus, when
Earl Robert de Mowbray, who had escaped
from Bamburgh castle and was trying to join
his friends at Newcastle, was intercepted by the
king's forces and fled for refuge to this church.
The soldiers, however, dragged him forth by
violence and made him a prisoner. This is said
to have been the only case of the violation of
the peace of St. Oswin.

The priory, though doubtless tenanted by
some who could appreciate its wild beauty, and
were not dismayed at its exposed situation and

* Hearne's Otterbourne a?id Wethamstede, ii. 579.

The Priory Church, Tynemouth.
(From a print, 1S13).

NORTHERN SANCTUARIES 171

severe climate, was regarded by the most of
the monks of St. Albans with considerable
dread ; it served as a place of banishment for
the refractory. A long letter is extant from
one of these southerner monks, written about
the year 1 200, in which he gives a highly
picturesque and vivid description of his new
home, on the top of a high rock surrounded
by the sea on all sides, save for one narrow ap-
proach, with waves breaking and roaring day and
night, and the north wind ever blowing. The
people, he says, live on a black and evil-smelling
sea-weed, which turns their complexions black.
In the springtime the sea air blights the blossoms
of the stunted fruit trees, so that you will think
yourself lucky to find a wizened apple, although
it will set your teeth on edge should you try to eat
it. " But," concludes the writer, " the church,
newly completed, is of wonderous beauty. Within
it rests the body of the blessed martyr Oswin
in a silver shrine, bedecked with gold and jewels.
Here it is that he poured forth his blood for
Christ, and here it is that he protects those
guilty of homicide, robbery, or sedition who
fly to him, and heals those whom no physician

can cure." ^

The Northumberland Assize Roll for the
year 1240 contains various references to the
remarkable liberty of Tynemouth, but it must

1 See a full discussion on this remarkable letter, and a transcript
of the original, in the New History of Northumberland, viii. 71-3.

1/2 SANCTUARIES

be understood that although the king's ordinary-
writs did not run within the various townships
pertaining to the priory of Tynemouth, definite
sanctuary only belonged to the immediate pre-
cincts of the priory.

Two men found a certain chest on the sea-
shore at Hadstone in the parish of Warkworth ;
they broke it open and took the goods which
it contained, and carried them into the liberty
of Tynemouth. The coroner testified that they
had taken many goods but was unaware of
their value. — A horse kicked a girl, causing
her immediate death. The first finder of the
body, though summoned, did not appear at the
inquest, because he was of the liberty of Tyne-
mouth. — Agnes, the daughter of Richard de
Wondehorn, struck Susannah, the daughter of
John the miller of Eschott, with a staff on the
head, so that she immediately died. Agnes was
taken and imprisoned in the gaol of Newcastle.
Thence she escaped into the liberty of Tyne-
mouth. — Alan, the son of Laurence, wounded
Richard Arkill near the town of Haliden within
the liberty of Hexham. Alan immediately fled
to the peace of Tynemouth, whence he was out-
lawed. His chattels were declared to be worth
1 6s. i|d. — John de Elaund struck William, the
son of Peter of Great Bavington, and held him
by the neck until he was strangled. John im-
mediately fled to the peace of Tynemouth, with
the usual result of being outlawed. His chattels

NORTHERN SANCTUARIES 173

were worth 48s. The town of Bavington was
in mercy for not having caught him, and the
townships of Bavington, Sokhnton, and West
Whelpington were also in mercy for not having
sent their full quota to the inquest. Ralph, the
clerk of Bavington, and another were in mercy
for having falsely valued the chattels. — Lyulph,
the brewer of Heddon, wounded Richard de
Heddon with a knife in the arm, so that he soon
afterwards died. Lyulph immediately fled to
the peace of Tynemouth, made his confession,
and was outlawed. His chattels were valued at
34s. The town of Heddon was declared in
mercy for not having captured him, and the
townships of Hocton, Roucester, and Great
Hydewyne were also in mercy for not having
come to the inquest.

Nor must information from another source
be overlooked. There is a chartulary of Tyne-
mouth priory at Syon House, the property of
the Duke of Northumberland ; it has not been
printed, but an abstract of the more important
contents is given in the eighth report of the
Historical Manuscripts Commission. A letter
therein of Edward H., written from York on
25th June, 1322, mentions that William de
Midleton, taken at the capture of Mitford castle
and imprisoned at Newcastle, had been delivered
by the Scots ; he thereupon fled and took refuge
in the liberty of the prior of Tynemouth. The
king urged the addressee to get him if he can ;

174 SANCTUARIES

and he wrote again to the same effect on 30th
June. In this year, too, as recorded on the same
folio of the chartulary, Richard de Tewing, prior
of Tynemouth, received a letter from William
Ridd and Richard de Emeldon, stating that he
had in prison one Nicholas de Hawkeley, who
was one of those who surrendered to them the
castle of Mitford, to the great good of the county
of Northumberland ; for which deed, they by
the king's authority received them to the peace;
they ask the prior to let Nicholas have the
benefit of the conditions, by which is apparently
meant the removal of him from the prior's
prison and his admission as a grithman.

From certain pleas of the Crown of the reign
of Edward I., entered in this same chartulary,
we also learn that one Michael de Flanders
having slain Geoffrey the reaper, in the fields
of Tynemouth, was taken and imprisoned in
the prior's custody ; but he afterwards escaped
from that prison and put himself in the con-
ventual church of the priory, where, before
Adam de Pykering, the coroner, he confessed
the crime and abjured the realm.

THE PRIORY OF WETHERHAL

The Cumberland Priory of Wetherhal in the
beautiful valley of the Eden, a few miles above
Carlisle, was founded about the year 1 1 06 by
Ranulf Meschin, as a cell of the great Benedictine

NORTHERN SANCTUARIES 175

house of St. Mary's, York. It was of much im-
portance in connection with chartered sanctuary
rights. The privilege of freedom from arrest
which it afforded to criminals, was conferred by
a charter of Henry I., by which he endowed it
with all the customs and liberties which were
then enjoyed by the great minster churches of
York and Beverley.^ The bounds of the sanc-
tuary were marked by six crosses, namely : (i)
the cross on the bank of the Eden opposite
Corby ; (2) the cross near the chapel of St.
Oswald ; (3) the cross by the porter's house {juxta
le loge), on the bank of the river ; (4) the cross
by the hedge at Warwick, on the boundary of
the manor which was called by way of emphasis
the Wetherhal " grythcrosse " ; (5) the cross be-
tween the vill of Scotby and the prior's grange
at that place ; and (6) the cross on the bank of
the stream at Cumwhinton. As was invariably
the case in these special sanctuary grounds, no
immunity was allowed to those whose offence
was committed within the liberty. On the fugi-
tive coming within the bounds of this asylum,
he was expected to make his way at once to
the conventual church, and there ring a bell.
Eventually he had to take an oath before the
priory bailiff of obedience to the ecclesiastical
authorities of the liberty.

' Particulars as to this sanctuary are set forth in the Register of
the Priory of Wetherhal which was edited by Archdeacon Prescott
in 1897.

176 SANCTUARIES

In 1292, three cases of taking sanctuary
within this liberty came to the cognisance of the
justices of assize at Alston, with the result that
the privilege of the peace of Wetherhal was once
again re-established. Andrew, son of Thomas of
Warwick, having slain a man by a blow on the
head with a club, fled to Wetherhal, and obtained
the peace of the priory in accordance with ancient
custom. In two other cases of manslaughter at
the same assize, the felons also sought and ob-
tained refuge at Wetherhal. In order to be assured
as to the warrant by which this privilege was
exercised, the justices summoned the abbot of
St. Mary's, York, as well as the prior of Wetherhal,
to make good their title. It was thereupon estab-
lished to the satisfaction of the jurors in these
cases, that the liberty of receiving felons within
its jurisdiction had been possessed by the priory
of Wetherhal from time immemorial, an oath
having been first taken by such felons that they
would conduct themselves well and not depart
beyond the bounds.^

In 1342, Wetherhal was one of the four sanc-
tuary places — the others being Beverley, Ripon,
andTynemouth — to whose grithmen Edward III.
offered pardon on condition that they should go
forth with his army to fight in Scotland.^

' Assize Rolls, Cumberland, No. 135, 20 Edw. I.

^ Rotuli ScoticB (Record Com.), i. 629. Owing to the name of
this place being wrongly spelt " Wederdale " instead of " Wederhale,"
several writers have hitherto been puzzled as to the identity of this
particular sanctuary.

o t

NORTHERN SANCTUARIES 177

THE PRIORY OF ARMATHWAITE

In the parish of Ainstable, Cumberland, on
a beautiful site near the junction of the Croylin
with the Eden, stood a Benedictine nunnery of
some repute. It is said to have been founded
by William Rufus in 1089, and a remarkable
charter of that king, cited and confirmed by
Edward IV. in 1480, is entered on the Patent
Rolls of that year. This charter is beyond all
doubt fictitious in several of its details and terms,
and is pronounced to be a " forgery " by the editors
of the Calendars of the Patent Rolls. It was
claimed in this charter that the king had granted
to this priory, within the house and the lands
adjoining, all the liberties that were enjoyed by
the abbey of Westminster. Such a grant as this,
if genuine, doubtless conferred on the priory full
sanctuary rights.

Surprise has been expressed more than once
of late years at the stupidity of the crown offi-
cials in not detecting the forgery, and righteous
scorn expended on the nuns for making pre-
posterous and baseless claims. But the facts
and probabilities of the case put the matter in
a very different light. This priory suffered most
severely during the wars with Scotland in the
first half of the fourteenth century. It also ex-
perienced most grievous losses in later years.
Letters Patent of Edward IV., of the year 1473,

M

178 SANCTUARIES

show that the prioress and convent of Arma-
thwaite, described as of the foundation of his
progenitors and under his patronage, had had
their houses and enclosures destroyed by the
Scots, and that they had been spoiled of their
goods, relics, books, plate, charters and other
muniments. Under these circumstances, the
king confirmed the priory in all its former pos-
sessions, and particularly in an old enclosure
called the " Nonne Close," and the nuns under-
took to pray for the good estate of the king, of
Elizabeth his consort and of Edward his son.

Seven years later, namely on 20th June,
1480, Isabel the prioress and her convent, who
had lost the whole of their charters and deeds,
presented a compilation of these rights and privi-
leges, which they believed to have been theirs
under the burnt muniments, assigning them to
William Rufus. It is foolish under these cir-
cumstances, when the crown officials knew that
the originals, by the priory's own pleadings, had
been destroyed, to style this charter " a forgery "
in the ordinary acceptance of the term, or to
charge the nuns with "bolstering up their claims
by a charter which was spurious on the face of
it." The Bishop of Carlisle was the priory's
visitor, and the election of each superior had in
turn to be confirmed by the diocesan and she
herself instituted. The notion that these nuns
invented and palmed off on the authorities of
Church and State a fraudulent document is

NORTHERN SANCTUARIES 179

simply ridiculous. More than one similar case
is extant wherein the elaborate processes are
recited of re-establishing the lost or destroyed
charters of a religious house. A commission
was appointed to take the evidence on oath of
the general statements of the missing documents,
including descriptions of the seals, by those who
had seen and examined them, and there is no
reason to doubt that a similar process was
undertaken in 1480 in connection with the
Armathwaite priory foundation charter before
the result was entered on the Patent Roll.

The nuns were also in possession of a stone
which substantiated their claim to special sanc-
tuary privileges. This stone was carved with a
cross, and round it the word " Sanctuarium " in
characters of a style as old as the supposed foun-
dation of the priory. On rising ground, to the
north-east of the house, in a field still known as
the " Cross Close," a pillar was built up about
nine feet high, into the face of which the old
stone was embedded. It is highly probable that
this pillar was erected in 1480, and that the
date 1088 in Arabic numerals (obviously cut
at a different time to the lettering) was then
added. A correspondent of the Gentleman s
Magazine of 1755 drew attention to this
pillar and stone and supplied a crude woodcut,
and Dr. Samuel Pegge, the celebrated antiquary,
contributed an explanatory statement. The same
author, writing in the Archceologia (vol. viii.)

i8o

SANCTUARIES

in 1785, on the " History of the Asylum or Sanc-
tuary," considered that the sanctuary stone built
into the pillar must have formed part of the frith-
stool. It is, however, far
more likely to have formed
part of one of the several
sanctuary boundary stones
set up at the time when
the original rights were
granted, and replaced when
these grants were re-estab-
lished. It is difficult to
imagine that the nuns and
their advisers would have
been so foolish as to erect
this stone on an obtrusive
pillar, if the claim was
fictitious, as in doing so
they would not only have
exposed themselves to the
ridicule and contempt of
the whole district, but also
to the severest ecclesiasti-
cal and civil penalties. An
illustration of this stone

The Sanctuary Cross,
Armathwaite.

is

given in Hutchinson's

History of Cumberland. The illustration here
supplied is copied from a drawing made early
in last century for Lysons' history of the county,
but not used (B. Mus. Add. MS. 9462, f. 91).
For our own part we have no doubt that

NORTHERN SANCTUARIES i8i

the priory was founded towards the close of the
eleventh century, and that its original privileges
included chartered sanctuary rights. It was,
however, a small and uninfluential house, and
its rights were ignored by the marauding Scots.^

THE CHURCH OF NORHAM

The church of Norham, on the mainland
opposite Lindisfarne, is sometimes named as a
chartered or special sanctuary. If it is true
that St. Cuthbert's body was moved here from
Lindisfarne, special sanctuary would doubtless
have been its privilege during the period of its
shelter in this church.

Reginald of Durham tells us that the church
of Norham was founded before the days of
St. Cuthbert. It was of much celebrity, and
formerly bore the names of Sts. Peter, Cuthbert,
and Ceolwulf. Egred, Bishop of Lindisfarne
831, rebuilt the church in Norham and trans-
lated there the body of St. Ceolwulf the king,
giving to it its triple dedication. Here, too,
according to Simeon of Durham, rested for a
time the body of St. Cuthbert. The Conqueror
gave the church and vill to the church of
Durham.

In 1 3 15 a commission was issued by the

^ There is a good sketch of the history of the priory in vol. ii. of
the Victoria History of Cumbcrla?id (1905), but we disagree in toto
with the writer's remarks as to the forged charter and this pillar.

i82 SANCTUARIES

Bishop of Durham to the prior of Holy Island
to enquire concerning a violation of sanctuary in
the church of Norham by John Tyllok and three
others, who took out of the church William le
Spyder, of Berwick, and detained him in Norham
castle, and to adjudge whatever penance they
deserved. James Marley, of Wilton, by will of
1524, directed his " bonys to be beriede within
the sanctuary grounde of the kirke of Sancte
Cuthberte in Norham." ^ This sanctuary ground
was, however, in all probability, only the
churchyard.

' Proceedings of Soc. of Antiq. of Newcastle, 3rd series, vol. iii.
126, 129.

CHAPTER VIII

SANCTUARY AT BEAULIEU AND OTHER
CISTERCIAN ABBEYS

Beaulieu Abbey — Case of William Wawe, 1427 — John CoUes, a frau-
dulent executor — Countess of Exeter and Queen Margaret at
Beaulieu — Thomas Croft, the Wichwood Ranger, 1491 — Perkin
Warbeck, 1496-9 — The Beaulieu Sanctuary Men at the sup-
pression — General claim of Sanctuary by Cistercian Houses —
Statute sanctioned by repeated papal authority — Letter of Arch-
bishop Pecham — Remarkable case at Waverley Abbey — The
Cheshire Abbey of Vale Royal — Tintern Abbey.

The important Cistercian Abbey of Beaulieu,
Hampshire, founded by King John in 1205,
possessed special sanctuary privileges which were
of much fame. These particular rights, which
extended for an indefinite period and throughout
a far wider area than the actual consecrated site,
were granted by Pope Innocent III. over the
whole of the immediately adjacent lands, which
had been secured to the monks by the foundation
charter of John. It stands to reason that there
must have been some limitation to the number
of those who were allowed to take up permanent
domicile close to the monastic precincts. There
do not appear to be any documents extant which
define the customs of this sanctuary. Doubtless
the fugitives were expected or compelled to work

in some way or another under the abbot's orders.

183

1 84 SANCTUARIES

But all details have to be left as a matter of con-
jecture. One of the earliest definite references
to a case of sanctuary in connection with this
abbey occurs in the year 1427, when the privy
council of 17th May gave the Abbot of Beau-
lieu eight days wherein to produce evidence of
his liberties and franchises, if any, which en-
titled him to retain at Beaulieu, William Wawe,
who was described as a heretic and traitor, a
common highwayman and public robber, a son
of iniquity, and a spoiler of churches and nun-
neries. If Wawe was in reality a heretic, that
in itself was sufficient to bar him from every kind
of sanctuary right, either temporary or permanent.
The information as to the outcome of this case is
limited ; but it seems fairly clear that the abbot
was unable to adduce sufficient evidence to justify
him in retaining this miscreant at Beaulieu. At
all events he was soon afterwards arrested out-
side any place of sanctuary, and, in the pithy
words of the chronicler Stow, " Wille Wawe
was hanged."

In this same year, the Parliamentary Rolls
make an interesting incidental reference to Beau-
lieu as a place of occasional refuge. John Colles
of Huntington, an executor, was charged by his
co-executors with having appropriated to his own
use certain trust funds, and it was also alleged
that he had conspired against the life of one of
them in the expectation, as the third was an aged
man, of himself becoming the surviving sole

OTHER CISTERCIAN ABBEYS 185

executor. Evidence was given that CoUes was a
man in straitened circumstances; that he did not
dare to live at large because of various malprac-
tices, and therefore fled to privileged places and
sanctuaries, such as Westminster and Beaulieu ;
and that he had no fixed residence wherein the
common law could be enforced against him.
Parliament itself was not strong enough to re-
move CoUes from Beaulieu or other places with
chartered privileges. But it was directed that
he should be proclaimed, and that on his non-
appearance the two other executors might act
in their own name in all courts spiritual and
temporal, and that any future executorial act of
Colles' should be null and void.^

Beaulieu played a somewhat important part
in the horrors of the Wars of the Roses. In
the spring of 1471, when Neville, Earl of War-
wick, was routed by the Yorkists at the battle of
Barnet, his widow, who was at Portsmouth, fled
for sanctuary to the abbey of Beaulieu. The sanc-
tuary was able to protect her person, and afforded
her suitable residence for fourteen years. All the
property of her family, the Beauchamps, was
confiscated, and it was not until the accession of
Henry VII. in 1485, that the countess regained
her liberty and title. The decisive battle of
Barnet was fought on Easter Sunday, and on the
same day Queen Margaret, who had been de-
tained off the French coast for some weeks by

^ Parliamentary Rolls, 6 Henry VI., p. 321.

i86 SANCTUARIES

adverse winds, landed at Plymouth with a force
of French auxiliaries, after a tempestuous passage
of seventeen days. No sooner had she landed,
than a messenger arrived with the fatal intelli-
gence, and she too with her young son hastened
for refuge to Beaulieu. There, however, the
Queen made but a short sojourn, for the Lan-
castrian lords who still remained faithful to her
cause, persuaded Margaret to leave this asylum,
conducted her to Bath, and there rallied a new
army to fight under her banner. Soon after-
wards, the Lancastrians were again defeated,
after a desperate struggle, at Tewkesbury. Her
young son Edward, Prince of Wales, was slain
under dastardly circumstances, and the Queen
was taken prisoner and thrown into confinement.

In 1 49 1, Thomas Croft, ranger of the forest
of Wichwood, Oxfordshire, accused of a " de-
testable murder," fled for sanctuary to Beaulieu,
where his life was saved, but his lucrative office
was forfeited.^

Beaulieu also played a part in the concluding
days of that remarkable impostor, Perkin War-
beck, who gave himself out to be Richard of York,
who was one of the two young princes smothered
in the Tower, nine years before he preferred his
imaginary claim in 1495. After various failures
to arouse any genuine measure of support from
the Yorkists in England, he availed himself of
a rising in Cornwall, and landing at White Sand

' Parliamentary Rolls, vol. vi. p. 441.

OTHER CISTERCIAN ABBEYS 187

Bay, he rallied a number of the insurgents to
make an attack upon Exeter. Hearing, how-
ever, that Henry VII. was approaching with a
great host, Perkin lost heart, left his followers
in the lurch, and, with tw^o or three of his com-
panions, rode off by night to BeauHeu, where
they registered themselves as sanctuary men. A
vain endeavour was made by the king's forces,
both by sea and land, to hem him in before he
could reach to privileged territory, but their
efforts were vain. The sanctuary precincts were
at once surrounded by a guard, and the king
consulted his advisers whether he should offer
Perkin his life if he left this city of refuge.
The council were divided in opinion. Some
advised that he should be taken out of sanctuary
by force and put to death, for it was a debatable
point whether the crime of high treason could
claim shelter, and they felt confident that at any
rate the Pope would be sufficiently tractable to
ratify such action either by declaration or at least
by indulgence. Others were of opinion that it
would be best for the king to promise to preserve
Perkin's life on surrender, for he might thereby
be able to thoroughly satisfy the world concern-
ing this imposture and to get to the bottom of
the conspiracy. Henry accepted the latter ad-
vice, and the lives of Perkin and those who had
taken refuge with him, were spared. The pre-
tender was carried to London and entered the
palace of Westminster in the king's train. He

1 88 SANCTUARIES

was ordered to confine himself to the precincts
of the palace, and was repeatedly under exami-
nation as to his parentage, his instructors, and
his associates. Weary of this limited confine-
ment, at the end of six months he managed to
escape, intending to reach the sea-coast. But
the alarm was given, all avenues to the coast
were patrolled, and the fugitive in despair once
more placed himself in sanctuary, though only
of the usual limited kind, within the priory of
Sheen (Richmond). The prior went to the
king and besought him for Perkin's life, leaving
all else to his discretion. Thereupon the im-
postor was placed for a day in the stocks at
Westminster Hall, and on the following day in
Cheapside, and on both occasions he was obliged
to read to the people a confession as to his real
parentage signed by his own hand. After this
he was committed to the Tower, but in 1499
he was again detected in conspiring, and then,
unable to escape again to claim sanctuary, he
v/as hung in 1499.

With the suppression of the monasteries
came the end of the historic sanctuary rights
throughout what was termed " the great close
of Beaulieu." The surrender of the abbey of
Beaulieu to the crown was signed on 2nd April,
1538. On that day the commissioners, at whose
head was the notorious Dr. Layton, wrote to
Cromwell, the lord Privy Seal, stating that there
were thirty-two sanctuary men there for debt.

OTHER CISTERCIAN ABBEYS 189

felony, and murder, who had their houses and
grounds where they Hved with their wives and
children. They declared that if sent to other
sanctuaries they would be undone, and they de-
sired to remain there for their lives, provided no
more were admitted. The commissioner desired
to know what was the king's pleasure. Thomas
Stevens, the subservient ex-abbot, wrote about
the same time to Thomas Wriothesley, after-
wards earl of Southampton, to whom the site
of the abbey had been granted, begging him to
be a good master to the Beaulieu sanctuary men
who were there for debt. He stated that they
had been of honest lives whilst he was their
governor, and it would be of no profit to the
place if they were to leave, for their houses
would yield no rent. Crayford, one of the sub-
commissioners for the suppression of monasteries,
also wrote to Wriothesley about the same time,
asking for the king's protection for the " miser-
able debtors," stating that all the inhabitants of
Beaulieu were sanctuary men, and urging the
immediate departure of the murderers and felons
as " hopeless " men. The upshot of the matter
seems to have been that the debtors were allowed
to tarry for their lives under protection at Beau-
lieu ; and it also transpires that one Thomas
Jaynes, who had slain a man at Christchurch,
was granted a pardon.

1 Letters atid Papers, Henry VIIL, xiii. (l), 668, 792, 796, 877, and
1309 (23).

192 SANCTUARIES

Beaulieu stood by itself among Cistercian
houses as a sanctuary of national repute, but the
abbeys of this order in general claimed a com-
plete right of permanent sanctuary, though not
of late years exercised to any particular extent.
Nor do any of them appear to have made in
England, at any time, efforts to attract criminals
or the persecuted, but rather contented them-
selves with sternly upholding their privileges
when occasion arose. Probably if any strong or
general attempt had been made in that direction
it would have been resisted, for the Cistercian
claims only rested on papal authority, whereas
our English judges more than once held that the
putting any permanent let or hindrance in the
way of justice through sanctuary could only be
based on royal charters.

The Cistercian privilege of not turning
away any felon from their doors, or at all events
of not giving up to justice any one who had
once obtained admission to their precincts or
even to their granges, was based on the fol-
lowing statute of their order, which received
the confirmation of three twelfth century popes,
namely Eugenius III., Celestine III., and
Innocent III.

Infra clausuras locorum seu grangiarum nostrarum, nuUus
violentiam vel rapinam seu furtum facere, ignem apponere,
sanguinem fundere, hominem capere, spoliare, verberare, vel
interficere, seu violentiam temere audeat excercere. Sed sint
ipsa loca sicut atria Ecclesiarum ab omni pravorom incursu
ac violentia auctoritate apostolica libera semper et quieta.

OTHER CISTERCIAN ABBEYS 191

Archbishop Pecham, in a letter to Robert
Malet, of November, 1289, says: "To the
crown belongs not only severity and rigor of
justice, but still more mercy and pity. By which
Holy Church, by the king's v.'ill, saves evil-
doers by sanctuary, by orders, and by the re-
ligious habit, as appears in the north country,
where murderers, after their crime, betake them-
selves as converts to the great abbeys of the
Cistercians and are safe." * The converts or
conversi were the lay brothers of the Cistercian
order, and from this letter it would appear that
a criminal flying to one of these abbeys and
proving himself penitent was admitted as a con-
vert, and was thereby pledged to lifelong labour
for the good of the convent.

The Cistercian houses always aimed at being
self-contained, and the lay brothers and servants
within the precincts followed a variety of trades
such as weaving the cloth from the wool of their
own sheep, and following the crafts of tailors and
shoemakers, as well as engaging in every form of
agriculture.

The annals of the famous Cistercian monas-
tery of Waverley supply a striking illustration of
the social life of the days of Henry III., and of
the power wielded by the Church. At Easter-
tide, 1240, a young man arrived at the abbey, by
trade a shoemaker. He was apparently of devout
life and was appointed to exercise his craft for

• Registrum Johan7iis Pecham (Rolls Series), iii. 995.

192 SANCTUARIES

the good of the house. For some months he
followed his trade as a shoemaker, peaceably and
successfully ; but on 8th August, a certain knight
arrived with his followers for the purpose of
arresting the young man on a charge of homicide.
Notwithstanding the protests of the abbot and
elder monks, who pleaded their privileges and
stated that the whole of their precincts were as
much a sanctuary as the very altars of the church,
the young shoemaker was seized, carried off
forcibly in bonds and committed to prison.
Dismayed at this bold defiance of their un-
doubted rights, and foreseeing that acquiescence
in this violation of their precincts might result
in the loss of all distinction between places sacred
and places secular, the monks agreed to suspend
all celebrations in their church until redress had
been obtained. The papal legate, Otho, was
then in England, and the case was laid before
him by the abbot. The legate, however, proved
remiss in the matter, and the abbot proceeded to
the king, with the complaint of grievous irrever-
ence, and a demand for immediate restitution to
them of the alleged offender. The king was
inclined to grant the request, but the abbot's suit
was opposed by the council, and he had to be
content with a promise that his petition would
be duly discussed on condition of his withdrawal
of the interdict which he had laid upon his house.
At length, after much trouble and persistence.
Abbot Walter Giffard won the day, and it was

OTHER CISTERCIAN ABBEYS 193

acknowledged that the enclosures of Cistercian
abbeys and granges were exempt by papal autho-
rity from civil action, and that all persons
violating the same were, ipso facto, excommuni-
cated. Thereupon the prisoner was restored, and
brought back to the abbey, and the violators of
Holy Church, having been cited by the legate
to appear at the gate of the monastery, there
to make satisfaction to God and the abbot,
were absolved, having previously been publicly
scourged by the dean of the house and the
vicar of Farnham.^

The foundation stone of the famous Cister-
cian abbey of Vale Royal, Cheshire, was laid by
Edward I. in 1277, but the whole of the con-
ventual buildings were not finished until 1330.
The elaborate charter of the royal founder was
held to cover definite immunity for fugitives
from justice. This privilege aroused fierce op-
position from the civil administrators of justice.
Early \r\. the reign of Edward II., a precept was
issued to Richard Sutton and Urian de St. Pierre,
in their office of Serjeants of the peace, to arrest
the abbot for receiving Ranulf Coyntrel, robber,
and other robbers ; and also to arrest Walter de
Childeston and John de Brecham, monks of the
house, for receiving Robert Shrap and six others
who were alleged to have taken part in a burglary
at the house of John, the chaplain of Weverham.
Coyntrel's offence was the stealing of a tunic

1 Annaks Monastici, vol. ii. 325-7.

N

194 SANCTUARIES

worth 40s. The Serjeants, however, reported
that the abbot and his monks kept within
their Hmits, and that they were unable to efFect
these arrests without infringing the hberties of
the Church. James, the bailiff of Weverham,
appeared before the justices, and cited the exact
terms of the charter of Edward I., whereby the
monks were clearly entitled to offer and main-
tain a refuge for any in danger of life or limb.
Moreover the king sent letters to Payn de Tybold,
justice of Chester, enforcing the rightful sanc-
tuary claims of the abbey, and ordering all such
proceedings to be withdrawn.^

Of the fair abbey of Tintern, in the valley of
the Wye, which also belonged to the Cistercians,
Leland wrote, about 1535, "There was a sanc-
tuary granted to Tinterne, but it hath not be
usid many a day." ^

Some further information as to Cistercian
sanctuaries will be found in a subsequent section
under Wales and Ireland.

^ Harl. MSS. 2064, f. 266. It is not a little curious to find
Ormerod, the great historian of Cheshire, evidently ignorant of
sanctuary rights, calling this incident " an infamous story."

" Leland's Collectanea, i. 104.

CHAPTER IX

OTHER CHARTERED SANCTUARIES

Battle Abbey — Itinerant Sanctuary — The Abbey of Colchester —
The Abbey of Ramsey — The Abbey of Croyland — The Abbey
of Glastonbury — The Abbey of Gloucester — The Abbey of
Bury St. Edmunds — The Liberty of Cuxham, Oxfordshire — The
Church of Abbots Kerswell — The Priory of Leominster — The
Cathedral Church of Lincoln — St. Hugh's claim of 1199 —
Sanctuary violation at Brackley — Sanctuary granted to the
close of Lincoln — Pardon to canons of Lincoln for illegal
claim.

BATTLE ABBEY

FTER the decisive battle of
Hastings, the Conqueror, in
fulfilment of a vow, began
to build an abbey in honour
of the Holy Trinity and
St. Martin on the site of
his great victory, known as
Battle Abbey, which was
supplied with Benedictine
monks brought from the monastery
of Marmoutier in Normandy. On
this religious house the Conqueror
conferred every possible privilege, as
is testified in a succession of charters,
which were confirmed by several of
his successors. Here it is only neces-
sary to refer to the special sanctuary

196 SANCTUARIES

privileges conferred by charter, which in one
respect were of a unique character. The
Chronicle of Battle Abbey, a valuable vellum
quarto, compiled in the latter part of the twelfth
century, is preserved at the British Museum.^ It
was translated by Mr. M. A. Lower in 1851 ;
the chronicle extends from the Norman invasion
to the year 1 176. The writer describes how
the founder's first gift to the abbey was to endow
it with the Leuga, or league of land lying round
it, which extended from the abbey as a centre in
every direction. The leuga, as the chronicler
states, was 7920 feet, or a mile and a half in
length ; therefore the tract of country over
which the abbey was absolutely supreme con-
sisted of a circle three miles in diameter.
" To the monastery he first granted and gave
the Leuga lying around it, entirely free from
all exaction and subjection by bishops, and
from the domination and customs of earthly
service of all other persons whatsoever, as is
proved upon the testimony of his charters.
. . . To this his abbey of St. Martin of Battle,
by his royal authority he gave and granted the
privilege of holding its own court^ with royal
liberties, and the right of negociating its own
affairs and the execution of justice. And if
any person guilty of theft, manslaughter, or

1 Cott. MSS., Dom., A. ii. The beautiful initial letter of this
chapter is taken from the opening sentence of the Chronicle ; it
represents the Conqueror in his chair of state.

CHARTERED SANCTUARIES 197

any other crime should, through fear of death,
take refuge in this abbey (that is within the
Leuga), he should receive no injury, but depart
entirely free. And if the abbot should chance,
anywhere throughout the realm of England, to
meet any (capitally) condemned thief, robber,
or other criminal, he should be at liberty to
release him from punishment."

There is at least one instance on record in
which an abbot of Battle claimed the princely
privilege of pardoning a condemned criminal
outside his own jurisdiction. It is stated that
"in 1364 the abbot of Battle (Robert de Bello)
going towards London, met a felon condemned
to the gallows in the king's marshalsea, and in
virtue of his prerogative, liberated him from
death. And although the king and other mag-
nates took much offence at the act, yet, upon
plea, he had his charter confirmed." ^

THE ABBEY OF COLCHESTER

On 14th May, 1453, Henry VI. granted
letters patent to Abbot William Audeley of
Colchester, and his convent confirming the first
royal charter of the year 1109, and all privi-
leges belonging to the house, making particular
reference to the rights pertaining to the abbey
of granting immunity of life and limb to any

1 Lower's Battle Abbey Ch7'onicle, 204.

198 SANCTUARIES

one whatever flying thither for sanctuary, from
whatever place and of whatever condition.
The letters then proceed to state that in con-
sequence of disputes and strifes, and at the
prayer of the abbot and his monks, the exact
extent of the precincts of the church and
house within which sanctuary held good was
hereby declared. The bounds were from the
lane called Hollane to the east of the church,
near the Barbican ; thence to the corner of the
wall enclosing the abbey on the south side, to
the corner of the wall on the west side ; thence
through the style called Courtstyle, to the end
of the lane called Loderslane, on the north side
of the church ; and thence through the margin
or northern extremity of the field called " Seint-
johnsgrene " to the place where the perambula-
tion began. These were to be the bounds of
the Colchester sanctuary for ever, within which
justices, escheators and all ministers of the
crown were never to enter. For the obtaining
of these authoritative bounds, the convent paid
a fee of 2os.^

In December, 1454, Thomas Fuller of Hal-
stead, weaver, fled to the sanctuary of this abbey
to avoid arrest for debt, at the plea of Henry
Viscount Bourchier, for _/^49, los. 4d. ; the
bailiffs of Colchester, by order of the county
sheriff, caused proclamation to be made each
week for five successive weeks at the gate of

' Pat. Rot., 31 Henry VI., pt. ii., m. 25.

The Gateway, Colchester Aeeey.

CHARTERED SANCTUARIES 199

the abbey that Fuller was to attend before the
justices at Westminster.^

This action was in accordance with the Statute
of 1379 to check debtors fraudulently resorting
to sanctuary (pp. 21-2).

THE ABBEY OF RAMSEY

The chartulary of the ancient Benedictine
monastery of Ramsey is preserved at the Public
Record Office. ^ The charter of foundation by
King Edgar of 974, therein set forth, states
that, with the advice and at the admonition of
his venerable friends Archbishops Dunstan and
Oswald, he ordained that any one accused of
treason or of any other offence flying to this
place was to be held safe in life and limb.
A charter of inspection and confirmation,
granted to the abbey by Edward III. in 1334,
recites a charter of Edward the Confessor
strongly corroborative of that of the founder
relative to sanctuary, wherein it is laid down
that " any fugitive from any place or for any
cause, and of whatsoever condition, seeking
refuge in this holy place or its precincts is to
have immunity of Hfe and limb."

Under date of July, 131 1, this chartulary
contains an entry relative to the chattels of

1 Colchester Red Book, <ib-T.

' Printed in three vols. (1884-1893) in the Chronicles and
Memorials series.

200 SANCTUARIES

Thomas de Pontesbury, rector of the church
of Cranfield, Bedfordshire. In the year 1292
Thomas fled to the church of Cranfield, of
which he was parson, in consequence of cer-
tain felonies proved against him before the
king's justices at Bedford, and for which he was
about to be put into gaol. His chattels, valued
at ;(^24, 14s. I id., were thereupon confiscated
to the crown, and put for the time in the
custody of the vill of Cranfield by the coroner
and sheriff. But meanwhile the king had
granted the chattels of the fugitive rector, who
had apparently abjured the realm, to the Master
and Brethren of St. Catherine's Hospital without
the Tower of London. Thence arose consider-
able pecuniary strife and confusion, which was
actually not settled until January, 1332-3, that
is to say forty years after the forfeiture had been
made ! The reason for these dilatory proceed-
ings being entered at length in this chartulary
is that the manor of Cranfield belonged to the
monks of Ramsey ; it was one of their most
valuable possessions, being returned at the time
of the dissolution as worth over ^^69 a year.

In 1235, according to the Close Rolls, the
servants of the abbot of Ramsey were them-
selves guilty of a gross violation of sanctuary.
In that year the abbot sent one Richard de
Chester, in custody of two of his servants, to
the king's gaol at Newgate. But it appeared
that Richard had previously been in the abbot's

Crowland Abbey.

CHARTERED SANCTUARIES 201

gaol, from which he had managed to escape,
flying for refuge into the conventual church of
Ramsey. From thence these two servants had
violently dragged him, and then by the abbot's
orders taken him to Newgate. The crown,
however, intervened and ordered the sheriffs of
London to release him, and to cause William and
Andrew, the monastery servants, to take him back
to Ramsey and replace him in the church.

THE ABBEY OF CROYLAND

The celebrated abbey of Croyland, said to
have been founded by Ethelbald on the swampy
island long the retreat of St. Guthlac, is some-
times cited as a place in possession of chartered
rights of sanctuary. But the authority for this
is only to be found in the chronicles of this
Benedictine house purporting to have been
written by one Ingulf, wherein is set forth, with
much detail, after a somewhat bombastic fashion,
the Historia Croylandensis, from its foundation in
716 down to about 1095. All modern scholars
now admit that this chronicle is but an historical
romance, and the whole of the charters quoted
therein can be shown to be fictitious, though
probably containing some germs of truth. For
instance, the elaborate charter of Wiglaf king
of Mercia, supposed to have been sealed at
London on 26th May, 833, is testified by a
cloud of witnesses. But of the ten bishops who

202 SANCTUARIES

subscribe, only two were living at the date speci-
fied ; the large majority of the abbots, priests,
and laymen who subscribe are also equally im-
possible. This clumsily forged charter attri-
buted to Wiglaf is the only " authority " for the
supposed sanctuary rights. It is, however, worth
while giving an abstract of this part of the charter,
for it shows what was in the mind of the com-
piler of" Ingulf," at the close of the eleventh cen-
tury, as likely to be the nature of such a privilege.
The feigned charter of Wiglaf provides that any
one throughout Mercia, who had committed any
kind of offence or was in any way obnoxious to
the law, flying to the monastery, invoking the
aid of St. Guthlac, and swearing before the abbot
perpetual fidelity and service, was to be held safe
and secure under the protection of the abbot and
his monks, so long as he remained within the
closely defined limits of the island of Croyland.
Any one daring to violate this sanctuary was to
lose his right foot ; but a fugitive trespassing
outside the bounds was at once liable to loss of
life or limb or to any other penalty that he might
have incurred.

THE ABBEY OF GLASTONBURY

In an elaborate charter granted by King
Edgar to the abbey in 971, additions are made
to the privileges granted by his father King
Edmund. The most exceptional of these was

mm

Wm(^^>

W':.

ilililii!"

iii

illill'!:'

O

u s

S (in

CHARTERED SANCTUARIES 203

one that made not only the abbot, but every
professed monk of the house, an itinerant sanc-
tuary. For if the abbot or any Glastonbury
monk should chance when on a journey to meet
a thief being led out for execution, or any one
else in danger of death at the hands of the law
in any part of the kingdom, he had the power of
granting him pardon.

There is no doubt that the precincts of this,
the most ancient, the most famous, and the most
hallowed of all England's abbeys, were always re-
garded as immune from all outside jurisdiction,
though it was difficult to produce the express
terms of any charter granting definite sanctuary.
The leading legal authorities of England con-
sidered Glastonbury sanctuary as well established
beyond the need of argument in the celebrated
case of St. Martin's le Grand in 1440 (p. 86).
The Somersetshire Assize Roll of 1243, sub-
sequently cited, records the case of the flight
of a felon to "the Hberty of Glastonbury."

THE ABBEY OF GLOUCESTER

A petition was presented to Parliament in
1485 by Sir William Brandon, late Marshall of
the Marshalsey of the King's Bench, appointed
thereto for Hfe by the late Duke of Norfolk as
Marshall of England. He stated that he had
been put so in dread of his life by " Richard late
in dede but not of right King of England the

204 SANCTUARIES

IIP " that he was fain, for salvation of his life,
to take tuition and privilege of the sanctuary of
Gloucester, abiding therein from Michaelmas,
1484, until the accession of Henry VII. in
August, 1485. During that time he did not
dare to come out of sanctuary to occupy his
office in the court of King's Bench, nor did any
deputy dare to act for him. He prayed that he
might be restored to office, and the answer of
parliament was Soit fait come il est desire.

THE ABBEY OF BURY ST. EDMUNDS

The precincts of this great Benedictine
abbey were immune from every kind of civil
interference, and therefore afforded a permanent
sanctuary to those fugitives whom the abbot and
his convent were willing to provide for beyond
the customary period. The " extorted charter "
of 1327, gained by the townsmen, includes this
interesting passage : " At the same time we will
and grant, that if any man in the town commit
a felony, and cannot get to the entrance into the
monastery, he may go to the Standard which
is appointed for this purpose, and if he can
clasp the said Standard, that then he be as com-
pletely safe, as if he had been admitted into
the church, until he can gain admission to that
church." ^

The wife of Hubert de Burgh, the great

' Arnold's Memorials of St. Edmund^ Abbey, iii. 315.

CHARTERED SANCTUARIES 205

justiciar, was in sanctuary in this abbey in 1233
(p. 41).

THE SANCTUARY OF CULHAM, OXFORDSHIRE

The famous Benedictine Abbey of Abingdon
of ancient foundation was endowed, in 801, by
King Kenulf, with the vill of Culham, on the
Oxfordshire side of the Thames, about 3I miles
to the south-east of the monastery. Culham,
according to the original charter, which re-
ceived papal confirmation, was to be held by
the abbey in absolute freedom from any kind of
ordinary jurisdiction ecclesiastical or civil ; the
abbot was to have sole rule without any inter-
ference from either the ministers of the king
or the officials of the bishop. In Kenulf's
full charter of benefactions, of the year 821,
Culham is named first of a large number of places
held by the abbey. This gift was specially re-
newed and confirmed by King Edmund in 940,
who in his charter describes Culham, with its
fifteen houses, as a place free from every worldly
obstacle. The precise bounds of Culham were
set forth at this latter date ; it is surrounded by
the Thames on three sides, and the parish now
contains about 2000 acres. Probably the vill
and manor of Culham was about conterminous
with the present parish. The interpretation put
upon the charter of Kenulf was that it conferred
the right of sanctuary throughout its limits,

2o6 SANCTUARIES

though not stated so in explicit terms, and this
is doubtless the reason why the Meta de Culham
were set forth in the Saxon tongue in the old
chartularies, whilst there are no similar entries
with regard to the other lands of the monastery.^

It is interesting to note that, when the abbey
of Abingdon was swept away and its possessions
ravaged and spoilt during the fierce raid of the
Danes in the tenth century, Culham was the one
part of their landed possessions which was left
at peace. The reason is not set forth by the
chronicler, but there can be little doubt that
it was in consequence of the respect shown to
its sanctuary rights.^

Complaint was made to Parliament in 1393,
that the Abbot of St. John of Colchester, and
the Abbot of Abingdon, in the vill of Culham,
Oxfordshire, were in the habit of enforcing the
same privilege of sanctuary as the church of
Westminster, namely immunity for all manner
of men coming and flying within the precincts
for debt, detenue, trespass, and all other per-
sonal actions, and that they suffered no bailiff,
coroner, or other minister of the crown, to per-
form their duties therein, in execution of the
laws. The abbots were ordered to appear, and
produce their warrants for such privileges.^ It
is quite obvious, from subsequent events, that

1 Chronicle of Abingdon (Rolls Series), vol. i. pp. 19, 24, 26, 92-3.

'^ Ibid., vol. ii. 276.

' Parliamentary Rolls, vol. iii. 320.

O

CHARTERED SANCTUARIES 207

both these abbots were able to substantiate their
claims.

Holinshed's Chronicles^ under the year i486,
when describing Lord Lovell's rebellion state
that : —

" Sir Humfreie Stafford, also, hearing what
had happened to the lord Lovell, in great dis-
pleasure and sorrowe, ... in like manner iied,
and tooke sanctuarie at Colnham, a village not
past two miles from Abindon. But because
that sanctuarie was not a sufficient defense (as
was proved before the justices of the Kings
Bench) for traitours, he was taken from that
place and brought to the Tower, and after put
to execution at Tiborne."

The monks of Abingdon had a large grange
and abundance of all kinds of farm buildings at
Culham, which would doubtless afford shelter
for fugitives who would be expected to give free
service to the officials. Culham was the most
fruitful possession of the Abingdon monastery ;
it brought in about ^70 a year at the time of
the dissolution. There was a stipendiary chap-
lain at the grange, and the farm servants included
a cowherd, swineherd, shepherd and blacksmith.
There was a good stock of sheep and pigs, also a
vineyard and a rabbit warren.^

' Vol. iii. p. 764.

" Accounts of the Obedientiars of Abingdon Abbey.

2o8 SANCTUARIES

THE CHURCH OF ABBOTS KERSWELL

A most singular and exceptional case of
prolonged sanctuary is on record, in the early
years of Henry III., in connection with a Devon-
shire church, which did not apparently possess
any chartered privileges. In 1232 the king
granted permission to the abbot of Sherborne
to take out of sanctuary from the church of
Abbots Kerswell, where he had been for the last
eight and a half years, one Richard, a deaf and
dumb man, where he had iled in consequence of
having caused the death of John Baldwin. The
abbot was allowed to take the mute out of that
church, and to lodge and provide for him during
life at the abbey of Sherborne ; he was not to
go outside the precincts. Information of this
permission of removal was at the same time sent
to the sheriff of Devonshire.^ Kerswell, near
Newton Abbot, was one of the most important
possessions of the abbots of Sherborne ; they
held both the rectory and manor.

THE PRIORY OF LEOMINSTER

The important priory of Leominster, a cell
of the great Benedictine abbey of Reading, is
included in lists of chartered sanctuaries by the
late Prebendary Mackenzie Walcott and others ;

'■ Close Rolls, 16 Hen. III., m. 14.

CHARTERED SANCTUARIES 209

but we have failed to find any authority for such
an assertion. It seems that the priory church of
Leominster had the same right of sanctuary for
forty days as was claimed by every consecrated
church throughout England. In one respect,
however, it differed from the ordinary parish
church. The Abbot of Reading exercised par-
ticular jurisdiction, through the prior, over the
whole town of Leominster, and in the case of
a fugitive desiring to abjure the realm no county
coroner could obtain admission. Thus in the
reign of Henry III., Alan Bubbe slew Hugh
son of Hildeburgh and fled into the church and
abjured the kingdom in the presence of the
bailiff of the Lord Abbot. The twelve jurors
say that no coroner of the king ought to come
or to interfere where any one has fled into the
church and abjured the realm, but the bailiffs
of the Lord Abbot only.^

THE CATHEDRAL OF LINCOLN

A highly interesting incident occurred in the
life of St. Hugh, Bishop of Lincoln. In the
spring of 1199, when he was setting out for
Normandy, as he was passing through the lands
of St. Alban's abbey, the bishop met with a
crowd of officials who were conducting a con-
demned thief, with his hands tied behind his
back, to the gallows. As the crowd approached

1 Townsend's History of Leominster, 17-18. As to this priory, see
also a reference under Episcopal Registers in this work (p. 248).

O

2IO SANCTUARIES

to receive the episcopal benediction, the culprit
flung himself at the feet of the bishop's horse
crying for mercy. Hugh bade the officers sur-
render to him the criminal and tell the con-
demning judges that the bishop had taken him
away. Subsequently Hugh most ingeniously
pleaded with the judges, who readily enough
admitted the right of sanctuary pertaining to
a church, that wherever there was a bishop in
company with the faithful there was also the
church, and therefore to a bishop with his
retinue belonged the church's privilege of being
a source of immunity to all in danger. The
judges, according to the ancient life of the saint,
admitted the force of this argument, and called
to mind that this privilege was expressly allowed
by the ancient laws of England, though lost
sight of through the sloth of modern prelates
or the tyranny of princes ; they therefore sanc-
tioned this episcopal rescue of the criminal, and
left it to the bishop to see that they incurred
no peril with the king.^

A similar instance of the rescue of a con-
demned felon is recorded of an abbot of Battle
in the reign of Edward HI., where it is said
that the king and magnates were grievously
offended, but that the abbot produced his
charters of liberties before the parliament, and
established his right to such a rescue.

'■ Vita S. Hiigotzis Lincolniensis, lib. v. cap. 9.
''■ Adam Murimuth, p. 129.

CHARTERED SANCTUARIES 211

St. Hugh, though an exceptionally merciful
man of his time, was most severe towards those
who violated the church's sanctuary privileges.
In the year 1200, a baiUff of the Earl of Leicester
resident at Brackley, Northamptonshire, took
out of the church of that town a fugitive thief,
who had sought sanctuary, and hung him.
Northamptonshire at that time was within the
diocese of Lincoln. The bishop was across the
seas, but immediately on his return Hugh ex-
communicated the bailiff and his accomplices.
The others submitted themselves to the discipline
of the church, but the bailiff fled to his lord
who was in Normandy. The accomplices ere
they could obtain remission of excommunication
had to undergo severe and remarkable punish-
ment. Stripped of all save their drawers, and
with bare heads and feet, they were obliged to
proceed to the foot of the gallows where the
man had been hung, dig up the corpse, and
carry the decaying body on their naked shoulders
for nearly a mile to the church of Brackley
whence he had been taken, and to bear it round
the church being scourged meanwhile by the
ministers, and then give it honourable burial.
Nor were their troubles yet at an end, for these
offenders had afterwards to walk barefoot to the
far-distant Lincoln, and there to be scourged
before each church of that city. Moreover
they had to undergo all this penance during
the cold of a severe winter season. Meanwhile

212 SANCTUARIES

the bailiff met with no sympathy from the Earl
of Leicester, who dismissed him from his ser-
vice, but at length he sought out the bishop
when the latter was on the continent, and he
was awarded seven years' penance.^

Henry de Burghersh, Bishop of Lincoln,
procured from Edward IIL, at the time when
he was chancellor, extended rights of sanctuary,
whereby fugitives were to enjoy the same
immunities that pertained to them within the
cathedral church, if they gained the shelter of
the bishop's palace or the houses of the canons
round the close, or the cemetery that extended
up to these houses.^

According to the Patent Rolls (17 Edw. III.,
pt. i. m. 23), pardon was granted by the crown,
in May, 1343, at the request of the Archbishop
of Canterbury, and out of consideration for
William de Norwich, Dean of Lincoln, to the
dean's proctor, Richard de Pulham ; he had
with others, taken from the bailiffs and ministers
of the sheriff of Lincoln, against their will, Little
John, sometime servant of John de Multan, and
Thomas de Bernelay, then in a cart, bound, to
undergo the sentence of hanging to which they
had been adjudged. Pardon was also granted to
him for the escape of the said Thomas from the
cathedral church of Lincoln, to which he and

' Viia S. Hugonis, lib. v. cap. 13.

''■ Schalby's Lives of the Bishops of Lincoln (Appendix to vol. vii. of
Chron. and Mem. ed. of Giraldus Cambrensis).

h-; CO

U
Z
O

CHARTERED SANCTUARIES 213

Little John were taken for sanctuary by the said
Richard and others. At the same time pardon
was granted in similar terms to the following —
Peter de Dalderby, canon of Lincoln, and his
yeoman, Walter de Stauren, canon of Lincoln,
and Robert de Landon, chaplain and penitentiary,
and three vicars of the same cathedral church ;
also the rectors of St. Peter at Arches, Lincoln,
Croxton and Blankney, as well as several chap-
lains, and William de Carleton, "fisshere."

CHAPTER X

TWO CORNISH SANCTUARIES

St. Buryan or Buriana — Athelstan's vow when conquering Cornwall,
936 — Leland's account — The case of Ivo Texton, 1278 — The
building termed "Sanctuary" at Boslivan — Numerous ancient
crosses in the parish — Date of crosses with Our Lord in short
tunic — Sanctuary of Padstow or Petrockstow, founded by Athel-
stan — St. Petrock — Various crosses — Aldestowe, the usual
medifeval name — Assize Rolls of 1283 — Many fugitives to the
sanctuary and port of Padstow — Jurisdiction of Prior of Bodmin
— Case of Richard de Pentenyn.

THE SANCTUARY OF ST. BURYAN

St. Buryan, nowadays commonly called Buryan,
is a large parish at the western extremity of
Cornwall, which, with its dependent parishes of
St. Levan and St. Sennen, for many centuries
formed a deanery under special jurisdiction as
a royal peculiar. The church of Buryan was
founded and endowed by King Athelstan about
the year 936, when he had conquered the
Scilly Isles and made all Cornwall tributary
to his rule. There is much confusion, as is the
case with so many of the Cornish saints, with
regard to St. Buryan or St. Buriana. She is
usually placed in the sixth century and claimed
as a king's daughter ; probably she is identica
with Bruinet mentioned by Leland, and with

TWO CORNISH SANCTUARIES 215

" Bruinsech the slender," named in the martyr-
ology of Donegal.^

The foundation of this important church is
attributed to a vow by Athelstan at the oratory
or chapel of St. Buryan before he set sail for
the Scilly Isles. It was founded as a collegi-
ate church for canons, with a dean and three
prebendaries. As might naturally be expected
from what Athelstan did for Beverley and other
great minsters in the north of England, this
king conferred on the church and precincts of
St. Buryan chartered sanctuary privileges, which
involved the permanent residence of fugitives
under certain conditions. The immunity bounds
probably extended for a radius of a leuga, or an
approximate mile and a half, round the central
church.

In the invaluable Itinerary of Leland, the
eminent antiquary of Henry VIII. 's days, there
are two entries relative to this place.

" King Ethelstane, founder of S. Burien's
College, and giver of the privileges and sanctuarie
to it. S. Buriana, an holy woman of Ireland,
sometyme dwelled in this place, and there made
an oratory. King Ethelstane goyng hens, as it
is said, onto Sylley, and returning, made ex voto
a College wher the Oratorie was."

" There lyith betwixt the sowth west and
Newlyn a myle or more off the se, S. Buryens, a
sanctuary, whereby, as nere to the chyrch, be

1 Borlase's Age of the Saints (1893), 71-2.

2i6 SANCTUARIES

not above viii dwellyng houses. Ther longeth
to S. Buryens a deane and a few prebendarys
that almost be nether ther. And S. Buryens ys
a iiii myles fro the very sowth west poynt."

The references to this Cornish sanctuary are
scanty, but there is one of much interest in
the year 1278, which estabhshes the fact that
ordinary legal processes did not run within the
liberty. In that year a petition was presented
to Parliament by Ivo Texton, who had married
a serf of John de Kirkeby, rector of St. Buryan,
and had dwelt with his wife more than half a
year within the sanctuary limits. But William
de Monketon, sheriff of Cornwall, ordered him
to be arrested and brought before him because
he had withdrawn himself from the decennary^
to which he had previously belonged, and caused
him to be warded by those of the four adjacent
decennaries for two months, so that he dared not
issue forth for fear of imprisonment. After-
wards the sheriff had caused him, through
Colin, his clerk of the hundred, to be detained
in the church and liberty of St. Buryan, where
a secular court was never held, and then, in
spite of the protest of the rector's proctor,
caused Ivo to be arrested and fined, and compelled
him to enter his old decennary ; he also caused
William, the provost of that district, to be fined
for allowing him to leave for a foreign court.

' Decenna or decennary was the name for the ancient combination
often vills for the maintenance of the king's peace.

TWO CORNISH SANCTUARIES 217

It was to be known that all, in times past, within
the liberty of St. Buryan were accustomed to
appear solely before the bailiffs of the church,
save in the case of pleas of the crown before the
king's justices/

In Lysons' Cornwall^ published in 18 14, it
is stated that there was an ancient building in
this parish on an estate called Boslivan, of which
the ivy-covered walls were then about twelve
feet high, which was said to have been the
sanctuary and was held in much veneration.
But this was a baseless idea, and the building,
which stood about a mile to the east of the
church, was probably only a large chapel. The
Complete Parochial History of Cortiwall, pub-
lished in 1867, mentions the remains of this
building, still called the sanctuary. Near it
stands an ancient cross.

It is not a little surprising that it does not
appear to have occurred to those who have
given so much attention to the subject of the
numerous ancient stone crosses of Cornwall, to
suggest that some of those in this parish were
probably marks of sanctuary bounds. Mr. A. G.
Langdon, in his thorough work on this subject,
enumerates thirteen old crosses within this parish
and two cross-bases. This is a considerably
larger number than is to be found in any other
parish of the county, and for our own part we
have little or no doubt that several of those

' Parliamentary Rolls, vol. i. p. 14.

2l8

SANCTUARIES

still standing mark the sites of old sanctuary
bounds.

Five of the crosses in this parish bear rude
figures of Our Crucified Lord. The one at
Boskenna stands at the meeting of three roads,
about a mile and a half south-east of St. Buryan
church-town ; the whole monument stands 6 ft.
lo in. high, but the actual cross, with Our Lord

Ancient Cross, Sanctuary of St. Buryan.

in a short tunic, is only 2 ft. 4 in. The cross of
Trevorgans stands about half a mile north-west
of the church-town by the side of the road to
St. Just. Chyoone cross is on the side of the
road leading to Boskenna, about a mile south-
west of the church-town ; it is of rude execu-
tion and originally stood much higher. In the
actual churchyard of St. Buryan stands a four-
holed cross on a great base of five granite steps ;
Our Lord wears a tunic and has a nimbus ; the
greater part of the shaft of the cross is missing.

TWO CORNISH SANCTUARIES 219

In the church-town, in the midst of the meeting
of three roads, a few yards to the south of the
churchyard, stands another ancient cross, on a
succession of great granite steps, with Our Lord
in a tunic' It is difficult to resist the behef
that at least all these crosses showing the Cruci-
fixion had some particular connection with
the ancient sanctuary. As it was founded by
Athelstan, it may reasonably be supposed that
this sanctuary, like all those of his founding
round northern shrines, had gradations of sanctity
attached to it, and this last named cross of the
church-town would probably mark the second
stage where the penalty of infringing the peace
of St. Buriana was doubled. Then would come
the churchyard or actual precincts with its own
churchyard cross ; the fourth stage would be
the nave of the church ; the fifth, the quire ;
and the sixth the actual shrine of the saint, for
the college was founded on the site where she
had been buried, and for infringement of this no
money payment sufficed, in the ancient days,
but the penalty was apparently death.

It is not intended to suggest that all these
crosses, at St. Buryan and elsewhere, representing
Our Crucified Lord in a tunic were necessarily
constructed in the days of Athelstan, for some
may be of a distinctly earlier date ; old crosses
might have been moved to mark sanctuary

1 Old Cornish Crosses (1896), by A. G. Langdon, pp. xxiii, 38, 125,
127-8, 189, 210.

220 SANCTUARIES

boundaries, as is supposed to have been the case
at Tynemouth and other northern sanctuaries.
At all events these particular crosses cannot be
older than the close of the seventh century.
The Agnus Dei was the original way of
signifying Christ in early Christian sculpture.
It was not until the holding of the Quinisext
Council of Constantinople in a.d. 683 that the
substitution of the actual figure of the Saviour
for the symbolic Lamb was permitted. It was
then decreed as follows : — " We pronounce that
the form of Him who taketh away the sin of
the world, the Lamb of Christ our Lord, be
set up in human shape on images henceforth,
instead of the Lamb formerly used." *

THE SANCTUARY OF PADSTOW

The sanctuary of Padstow, the name is a
corruption of Petrockstow, seems to be almost
entirely forgotten by modern writers. Never-
theless it was evidently one of great importance
in the west of England in mediaeval days, and
was of much more fame among the criminal
classes or those likely to require special sanctuary
than was the case with the more remote sanc-
tuary of St. Buryan at the extremity of the
county. Like that of St. Buryan, it owed its
origin to King Athelstan, the great founder of
our English chartered sanctuaries.

^ Romilly Allen's Christian Symbolism, 179.

TWO CORNISH SANCTUARIES 221

Leland, writing in 1533, after describing
Padstow " as a good quick fischar town but on-
clenly kept," says : — " This town is auncient,
bearing the name of Lodenek in Cornische, and
yn Englisch, after the trew and old writinges,
Adelstow, Latine Athelstajii locus. And the
toune there takith King Adelstane for the chief
gever of priveleges unto it."

St. Petrock, called by Fuller " the captain of
the Cornish saints," is said to have been of royal
Welsh blood. After many years of study in
Ireland, he sailed up the estuary of the canal
and landed at Padstow, where he established a
monastery, making it the centre of his missionary
labours. Here he died and was buried in 564.
Owing to the frequent raids made by the Saxons
and Danes on the shores of this creek, the
monks of Padstow (the old Celtic name for
which signified the creek of robbers) were fre-
quently harassed, and at last they left their
quarters carrying with them the body of their
saintly founder, and established themselves at
Bodmin. The complete destruction of the Pad-
stow monastery was effected in 997.

Traces of early Christianity are to be found
in Padstow itself, as well as in the surrounding
district, in the shape of ancient crosses. There
are considerable remains of what was once an
exceptionally fine and lofty churchyard cross,
close to the entrance at the south-east angle of
the churchyard of the parish church, which is

222

SANCTUARIES

dedicated to St. Petrock. This base and frag-
ments of the shaft were found when digging a
grave in 1869. Mr. Langdon {Old Cornish
Crosses) considers the front of the shaft to be "a

splendid example of in-
terlaced work formed
out of eight-cord plait-
work." On the east
side of the churchyard
is the site of the old
vicarage, and in the
garden wall there is
built up the well-carved
head of a small four-
holed cross. But by
far the finest of the
Padstow crosses stands
in the grounds of Pri-
deaux Place, which is
situated about a quarter
of a mile west of the
parish church, and is
traditionally stated to
occupy the site of the
ancient monastery. It
consists of a very fine four-holed head, and a
considerable part of the shaft, standing on a
modern base.

A like tradition prevails at Padstow as at St.
Buryan to the effect that Athelstan made a vow
here, before his fleet set sail for the subduing of

Ancient Cross, Prideaux Place,
Padstow.

TWO CORNISH SANCTUARIES 223

the Scilly Isles, to establish special privileges
around the original site of St. Petrock's burial,
in the event of success. It does not seem pos-
sible to glean from any early charters or authori-
ties definite information as to the extent of the
chartered sanctuary rights granted to the church
of St. Petrock by Athelstan, but it was probably,
following other examples, a leuga or a mile and
a half from the church in all available direc-
tions. The sanctuary rights at a later date were
said to embrace the whole of the " liberty " of
Padstow, but whether this was more or less
than the manor of Padstow, of which the priors
of Bodmin were lords, cannot now be ascertained.
The present parish of Padstow embraces upwards
of 3000 acres of land, exclusive of foreshore and
tidal waters.

The only place in which we have succeeded
in obtaining definite information as to this sanc-
tuary is in the few surviving Assize Rolls of
the county of Cornwall which are stored at the
Public Record Office. For the year 1283-4, the
exceptionally full rolls record sixteen instances of
sanctuary seekers in the church of St. Petrock.
Moreover in several instances, various offenders
are named in the same entry ; thus in one case
Roger de Oxenford and Margery his wife, as well
as another married couple, are registered as being
engaged in the selfsame robbery. It need not,
however, be supposed that all or even the greater
part of these sanctuary seekers came to Padstow

224 SANCTUARIES

because of the special or permanent privileges
granted to fugitives by Athelstan and confirmed
by later charters. The chief reason why those
who had committed felony in various parts of
Cornwall and Devon came to Padstow would
doubtless be because it was a busy port and was
in fairly constant communication not only with
Wales and Ireland but with Brittany and Nor-
mandy. There would therefore be no long
tarrying here for a ship after the oath of abjura-
tion had been taken, and above all the misery
and shame of a considerable pilgrimage from
parish to parish to gain a port would be
avoided. It was only a few yards' walk from
the churchyard gates of St. Petrock's church to
the quayside.

It comes out clearly from the one or two
longer entries on the Assize Rolls as to these
Padstow fugitives that the county coroner was
not permitted to question any who had sought
refuge within the liberty of Padstow, or indeed
for any other purpose, for it is expressly stated
that the manor belonged to the prior of Bodmin
and that jurisdiction was in his hands. This
jurisdiction probably, as elsewhere, enabled him
to accept as permanent residents, or for as long
as they pleased, those flying from civil justice,
provided they behaved themselves well and
yielded due obedience to the church authori-
ties. In fact they would be in the same posi-
tion as the grithmen of Beverley, Durham, and

TWO CORNISH SANCTUARIES 225

other northern chartered sanctuaries. It was
only when outsiders, or those who were resi-
dent sanctuary men but desired to leave the
country, put themselves in the church and called
for the coroner, that that county and crown
official was suffered to enter the liberty. The
Prior of Bodmin had no power to secure a free
passage to France or elsewhere ; the oath of
abjuration, with its sequel of a sea voyage, could
only be administered by the coroner.

In one instance it is stated that the fugitive
had placed himself in the church for two months
before the coroner arrived to enable him to abjure
the realm. In another case, it is entered that
Richard de Pentenyn placed himself in the
church of St. Petrock of Aldestowe, and before
John de Trenton, the coroner, confessed that he
was a robber and guilty of many robberies, and
abjured the realm. He had no chattels. And
it was testified before the jurors that Richard,
with others, who had committed other felonies
both in Devon and Cornwall, had placed them-
selves in the liberty of St. Petrock of Alders-
towe, and there remained, with the intention,
it appears, of eventually claiming abjuration
sanctuary within the actual church. It is added
to this entry that the Prior of Bodmin held the
manor.

There are also two or three entries relative to
temporary sanctuary in Padstow church, in the
Assize Roll of 1302-3, and one wherein Thomas

p

226 SANCTUARIES

de Stratton, for fear he should be taken, placed
himself within the safeguards of the liberty —

posuit se in libertatem Sancie Petroci de Allestowe
que est sanctuarium}

' For further particulars as to these' Cornish Assize Rolls, see
chapter xiv.

CHAPTER XI

SANCTUARY INCIDENTS IN CITIES

The City of London, 1231-1555— The City of Canterbury, 1273-1426
— City of Norwich Coroners and Assize Rolls, 1267-1464 —
Norwich Cathedral Sanctuary — Borough Customs of Waterford,
Bury St. Edmunds, Fordwich, Dover, Hastings, and Rye.

CITY OF LONDON

There are several sanctuary incidents well
worth rescuing from scattered documents which
occurred in the city of London other than those
connected with the chartered sanctuaries of
Westminster or St. Martin's le Grand, or those
mentioned under leading historical events.

In the year 1231, when Walter de Buflete
and Michael de St. Helens were sheriffs, it
happened that on the night of Thursday next
after the feast of St. Luke (13th Dec.) a cer-
tain man, Ralph Wayvefuntaines by name, was
stabbed with a knife by a certain stranger in
the churchyard of St. Paul's in London ; of
which wound on the morrow he died. One
Geoffrey Russel, a clerk, was with him when
he was so stabbed ; he fled to the church of
St. Peter in London, and refused to appear unto
the peace of his lordship the King, or to leave

228 SANCTUARIES

the church, but afterwards he escaped thence ;
and (although) the said sheriffs caused the
churchyard to be watched, still, while so watched,
he made his escape.^

Information reached the chamberlain and
sheriffs of the city, on 19th May, 1278, that one
Henry de Lanfare was lying dead in the house of
Sibil le Feron in the ward of Chepe. Where-
upon an inquest was held before the coroner when
the jury made the following return — One Richard
de Cadisfold fled to the church of St. Mary,
Staining Lane, by reason of a certain robbery
imputed to him by William de London, cutler,
and the same William pursued him in his flight.
It so happened that on the night of 5th May,
when many persons were watching round the
church to take him if he came out, a certain
Henry de Lanfare, ironmonger, one of those
watching, hearing a noise in the church, and
fearing that Richard was about to escape through
a breach in a glass window, went to examine it.
The said Richard and one Thomas, the clerk of
the church, perceived this, and Thomas seizing
a headless lance struck at Henry through the
hole in the window, and wounded him between
the nose and the eye, almost to the brain. From
the effects of this wound he languished until
19th May, when he died about the third hour.
Thomas was taken and imprisoned in New-
gate, but afterwards delivered before Hamon

' Liber Albus. 82.

SANCTUARY INCIDENTS 229

Haweteyn, justiciary of Newgate. Richard was
keeping himself within the church.^

The Patent Rolls of 1284 record the appoint-
ment of a commission of oyer and terminer to
Roger de Northwode, John de Cobeham, Geoffrey
de Pycheford and Henry de Waleys, mayor of
London, touching those "satellites of Satan," some
of whom, after solemn inquisitions, had already
been consigned to gaol, who by night entered
the church of St. Mary le Bow, London, and
violently seized Laurence Duket, who had sought
refuge there for some alleged crime, and after
various torments hanged him with a rope in
the said church.

On the feast of St. George, 23rd April, 1289,
Walter Bacun, chaplain, fled to the cathedral
church of St. Paul. Whereupon William le
Mazeliner, coroner, together with John le Breton,
warden of the city of London, and other trust-
worthy persons, demanded of the said William
the reason for his taking sanctuary. Whereupon
he confessed that he had stolen sixteen silver
dishes which belonged to Sir Baronein. Upon
this acknowledgment the said dishes were de-
livered by the coroner to William de Betoyne,
then sheriff, to be kept by him under the seal
of Sir Baronein. On 25th April the dishes
were brought to the Guildhall and restored to
Baronein.^

' Riley's Memorials of London, \i']ii-\ii,\f), pp. i6, 17.
* Ibid., 1276-1419, p. 24.

230 SANCTUARIES

The aldermen, on 19th May, 1298, made
order that no thief, murderer, or other person,
taking refuge in the churches, should from
thenceforth be watched, so long as they remain
within the same/

Pardon was granted to the commonalty of
the city of London in 1321 for neglecting to
keep watch on those who take sanctuary in the
churches of the several wards of the city.^

In 1 32 1— 2 a murder case occurred in London
in which sanctuary proved of no avail. A woman
named Isabella Bury slew the clerk of the church
of All Saints by London Wall, and placed herself
for sanctuary in the same church. After she
had been there five days the Bishop of London
wrote a letter stating that no immunity could
be given by Holy Church in such a case ; the
crime had apparently been committed within
the actual church. The woman was thereupon
taken out of the church and placed in Newgate,
and in the course of a few days was hung.^

The sheriffs of London, according to the
Close Rolls of 1337, were ordered to cause
Andrew de Sutton to be taken from prison and
brought to the church of All Hallows, Hay-
wharf, London, without delay, to stay there
according to the ecclesiastical liberty, as Stephen
Bishop of London had shewn the king that

' Riley's Memorials of London, p. 36.

^ Liber Custujiiamm, vol. ii. pp. 346-7.

^ Croniqices de Lo7idon (Camden Soc. 1844).

SANCTUARY INCIDENTS 231

although Andrew had taken sanctuary at that
church, and had entered the porch and held
the ring of the door in his hand for some time,
yet certain sons of iniquity drew him, who then
called himself John de Catton, violently from
the porch and led him to prison.

The Grey Friars Chronicle has the following
entry under 1528 : "This yere was a prisoner
brake from the halle at Newgate whanne the
cecions was done, that was browte downe in a
basket, and brake thorow the pepuUe, and went
vn-to the Gray freeres, and there was vi or vii
dayes. And at the last the shreffys came and
spoke with hym in the churche, and, for be-
cause he wolde not abjure and aske a crowner,
with gret violens of them and their offecers toke
hym owte of the churche, and soo the churche
was shott in from Monday vn-to Thursday, and
the seruys and masse sayd and songe in the fratter ;
and that day the bushoppe of Sent Asse browte
the sacrament solemply downe with processioun,
and soo the powre prisoner continued in prisone,
for they sowte all the wayes that they cowde,
but the law wolde not serue them to honge
hym, and at the last was delyuered and put at
lyberte."

The Acts of the Privy Council (New Series,
vol. V. pp. 220—1) contain the following note: —

" II Jan. 1555.

" A lettre to the Master of the Savoye signi-
fieing unto him the Quenes pleasure to be that

232 SANCTUARIES

he himselfe and John Piers, oone of her Majesties
servants, shulde forthwith upon receipte thereof
use all the diligence they maye for the searching
and finding out of oone Thomas Burley, a
prysoner attaynted for a wilfuU murdre, lately
escaped out of Newegate, conveyeng himselfe
into the Savoye ; and, being founde out, to
cause him to be redelivered unto Alexandre
Andrewe, the Keper of Newgate."

THE CITY OF CANTERBURY

The Patent Rolls of 1273 enter the appoint-
ment of a commission to Fulk Peyforer and
Simon de Craye, to enquire, by jury of Kent, to
whom belongs the custody of felons fleeing to
churches of the city of Canterbury, and whether
the citizens or their ancestors used to be amerced
for escapes, or others ; it having been shown on
behalf of the citizens that although neither they
nor their ancestors, in times of voidance of the
archbishopric, or at other times used to be
amerced before the justices in eyre in those
parts for such escapes, Master Roger de Seyton
and his fellows, justices last in eyre in the
county of Kent, greviously amerced them on
that charge.

The Patent Rolls of 1295 contain a remark-
able entry relative to the ancient church of St.
Martin of this city.

" Whereas Robert, son of Hamon Prat of

SANCTUARY INCIDENTS 233

Wingham, Kent, lately hung for robbery, was
afterwards taken down from the gallows, and
placed upon the ground as dead, and was thence
carried to the church of St. Martin at Canter-
bury, and there was found to be still living.
The King, for the honour of God and devotion
to the aforesaid saint, has pardoned him and
granted him his peace."

Similar incidents happened in a church at
Bath in 1280, and in a church at Norwich in
1285, as subsequently recorded.

Among the muniments of the city of Canter-
bury two precedents of 1293 ^"^ ^S^S? ^^^
relating to felons' goods, and the other to the
custody of persons taking sanctuary, are copied
in a hand of about a.d. 1500. In each case
proceedings were taken before the Justices in
Eyre, and their decisions were accepted as law.
In the first the prior of Christ Church had taken
possession of the goods peni^ente lite, and was left in
misericordia as a penalty for his impatience. In
the other, in which a felon escaped after taking
sanctuary in the church of St. John's Hospital,
the ward of Northgate, in which the Hospital
is situated, was amerced, the Judges ruling that
the men of the ward ought to have prevented
the escape of the felon, although they might
not molest him as long as he kept within the
church.^

In 1426 the chapter of the monastery of

^ Hist. MSS. Coin. Reports, ix. 171.

234 SANCTUARIES

Christ Church, Canterbury, appealed to Arch-
bishop Chicheley for help against the citizens of
Canterbury. The two Bailiffs, William Billing-
ton and Richard Cutler, led a mob of disorderly
townsmen to endeavour to remove from their
church, where he had taken refuge, a young
man, Bernard, a goldsmith from across the seas,
who had escaped from their custody. What
made the offence so much more grievous was
that the mob burst into the quire at the very
time of the Consecration of the Elements during
high mass, using violence and blows, together
with vile and threatening language, causing a
scandalous uproar. The young fugitive had
taken refuge within the iron rails round the
archbishop's own new tomb, from which they
endeavoured to drag him by force. By the aid
of the archbishop's commissary and others of
the confraternity of the church, the monks were
able to defeat the bailiffs, although the fugitive
was dragged from the tomb to which he clung
and out of the quire into the nave.

CITY OF NORWICH

The records of the city of Norwich contain
many references to sanctuary. It has been
claimed that the church of St. Gregory was
specially used by sanctuary seekers,'^ but we have
not been able to find any confirmation of this

' Norfolk Archeology, vol. ii.

SANCTUARY INCIDENTS 235

idea, which seems to have been based upon the
notions that a beautiful bronze closing-ring boss
on the south door, now moved to an inner
vestry door, was a "sanctuary knocker" (see
p. 124), and that the rooms over the porches
would have been suitable for fugitives. Neither
of these reasons has any true weight.

The late Mr. Harrod, a distinguished
archsologist, contributed various articles to
early volumes of Norfolk
Arch ceo logy with regard to
the city muniments of
Norwich. The following
extracts from the local
Coroner's rolls are chiefly
taken from his excerpts: —

WilHam Sot, of Hem-
stead, near Happisburgh,
placed himself in
church of St. Gregory, the
Monday before St. Bartholomew's day, in the
year 1267. The Coroners and Bailiffs went
and interrogated him why he had placed him-
self there ; and he confessed before them that
he did so because of certain robberies he had
committed, namely, on account of certain cloths
he had stolen at Hemstead ; and he was taken
at Yarmouth and there incarcerated, whence he
escaped, and therefore placed himself in sanctuary.
And he abjured the realm, and had protection to
Sandwich.

the "^°^^ ^°^ Closing-ring, St.
Gregory, Norwich.

236 SANCTUARIES

John Schot, of St. Edmund's, placed himself
in the church of the Friars Preachers the Friday
after the Conception of the Blessed Mary, in the
year 1295, acknowledged to have stolen goods
and chattels of merchants of Winchelsey and
Flanders to the value of £2°-> ^^'^ ^'^ have
broken prison at Yarmouth ; he abjured the
kingdom the Monday following, and a port is
given to him at Portsmouth within 3 weeks.
Walter Brun, coroner, John With, Nicholas le
Potter, and other of the king's lieges, present. His
chattels : i short jacket, value 3s., Henry le Rus
to answer; one tunic, iid. ; one corset, i4d. ;
one hood, lod. ; one pair of socks and one hood,
3d. ; a sword and buckler, i8d., whereof
Nicholas le Potter answers ; also a feather-bed,
I4d., whereof Henry Sergeant to answer. Md.
that John Bon, of Ipswich, received the above
^^30 from him.

Geffrey Gom, of Lynn, placed himself in
the church of Friars Preachers same day, and
acknowledged to have killed Richard . . , of
Gascony, and to have broken prison at Yar-
mouth the day and year aforesaid ; he abjured
the kingdom the Monday aforesaid, and port is
given him at St. Botulph's (Boston) in fifteen
days. The same parties present. No chattels.

Richard Clerk, of Norwich, placed himself
in the church of St. Nicholas the same day, and
acknowledged to have killed John Russell, and
to have broken prison at Yarmouth ; abjured the

:rf'.?r/':^7XW ■>;

O

2

X

o

SANCTUARY INCIDENTS 237

kingdom the Wednesday after the feast of St.
Lucy the Virgin, in the year of King Edward
23, and port is given him at Hampton (South-
ampton) in a month. Present there, Walter
Brun, coroner, and others. No chattels.

On Monday, in the first week of Lent, 1285,
Roger de Wylby, Adam le Clerk, James Nade,
and WilHam de Burwode, being bailiffs, one
Walter Eghe was taken for stealing cloth from
the house of Richard de la Ho, and for other
thefts, and on the Wednesday following was
taken before the bailiffs and whole community
of the city in the Tolbooth. He was found
guilty, hung, taken down from the gallows,
and carried to St. George's Church to be
buried, when he was found to be living. The
jury at the next assizes found that William, son
of Thomas Stanhard, took him from the gallows ;
that 4 marks, the felon's chattels, were in the
hands of the sheriff ; that he [Walter Eghe]
remained in that church for 15 days, watched
by the parishes of St. Peter of Hundegate, St.
Mary the Less, Sts. Simon and Jude, and St.
George ; that he then escaped, and there was
judgment against the 4 parishes ; that he then
placed himself in the church of the Holy Trinity,
and there remained until the king at his suit
pardoned him. The bailiffs and community
were required to say by what authority they
adjudged him to be hung.

This record brings prominently to notice the

238 SANCTUARIES

great cost the right of sanctuary must have
been to a town ; felons were frequently fleeing
to the churches for all sorts of offences, and
immediately casting the burden of a strict watch
on the four adjoining parishes while they
remained there.

On an Assize Roll for Norwich, 1286, the
jury presented that Wm. de Loddon, clerk, and
Hugh Maydenelove were taken for stealing sheep,
and other thefts, and imprisoned in the Tolhouse
of the city. Hugh broke prison, and carried the
same William upon his back to the church of St.
John of Ber Street, whose foot had rotted from
his long imprisonment. On the morrow, when
the bailiffs found the same William, he went out
of sanctuary and rendered himself to the king's
peace. Christina Startup of Lodne accused
him of stealing 22 sheep. At first he said he
was a clerk, and said he was unable to answer
the bailiffs, when asked by them how he wished
to be tried. Subsequently, in the absence of the
prosecutor, the bailiffs acquitted and released
him, and had judgment against them at the
assizes for the acquittal. Meanwhile the
merciful Hugh Maydenelove abjured the realm.

On the same Assize Roll, " the Jury of the
Hundred of Smethedon presented that Christiana
Gamot, and Nicholas, the son of Mariota Bagge,
of Hunstanton, were taken on the indictment
of the country, and carried in custody to Hun-
stanton, where they escaped. . . . Therefore

SANCTUARY INCIDENTS 239

judgment against that town for allowing the
escape. And the said Christiana immediately
placed herself in the church of Hunstanton, and
acknowledged herself a thief, and abjured the
realm before the coroner. Had no chattels.
And the said Nicholas fled, and afterwards
placed himself in the same church, and ac-
knowledged himself a thief, and abjured the
realm before the coroner. He had no chattels,
nor was he in the leet. And after abjuring the
realm, he returned into the country and broke
into the house of John Norman of Hunstanton,
and took and carried away goods and chattels of
the same John to the value of 26 marks ; and
flying when hue and cry were raised, he was be-
headed, on the suit of the said John and of the
country. He had no chattels."

In October 1464, it was declared by the
Recorder of Norwich that there were differences
between the clergy and laity concerning the
guarding of a certain Thomas White, who took
sanctuary within the churchyard of St. Mary
Incombusta, for the homicide of John Cook,
yeoman, and how he had been guarded for 40
days. " And seeing that he refuses to abjure the
realm within 40 days, by the advice of William
Yelverton, the King's Justice, and others skilled
in the law, a proclamation was made throughout
the city by the coroner, that no one should give,
send, or throw food to the said Thomas White
in any way whatsoever, under the penalty of a

240 SANCTUARIES

charge of felony. Whereupon came Master John
Galet, vicar-general of the Lord Bishop, with
the prior of the cathedral and a great number of
other ecclesiastical persons, and claimed that they
may have leave to spend alms on the said
Thomas for procuring ecclesiastical privilege,
or that the said Thomas should be delivered to
them, under sufficient security to be found for
him for the indemnity of the city. And the
Recorder considers that these questions are very
difficult and ambiguous in law to be answered,
wherefore it is well to be further advised." ^

In 1 55 1, Alexander Chapman, of Norwich,
had a lease granted him for 99 years, at an
annual rental of 6s. 8d. of " All that chamber
within the precynte of the cathredrall churche
aforesaide, sometyme called the Sanctuarye Mens
Chamber," adjoining the Jesus chapel.

BOROUGH CUSTOMS ^

Within boroughs it was, for the most part,
the duty of the officials to guard those in sanc-
tuary from escape. A few further notes on this
subject are added. The borough of Waterford
definitely provided, c. 1300, that —

" If a man or woman has fled to a church
because of killing, or for larceny, or for receiving
criminals, and is in the church, the bailiffs and

'■ Records of the City of Norwich, ii. g6.

^ See Miss Bateson's Borough Customs, vol. ii. (1906), pp. 34-5.

SANCTUARY INCIDENTS 241

coroners ought to send for a Serjeant to cause the
neighbours to be summoned to watch the church
that these offenders do not escape. And then
the coroners shall come and ask those who are
in the church if they will come to the peace of
the king, or if they wish to keep in the church.
And if within 40 days they will come out and
abjure the king's realms, the coroners ought to
charge them thus" (followed by the customary
oath of abjuration).

A small number of boroughs, however, dis-
tinctly repudiated all such obligations, and were
apparently permitted to evade them. Swansea, in
1305, declared their freedom from any demand
of this nature, and declined to be held responsible
for escape from church. The abbey and convent
of Bury St. Edmunds, in 1 327, released the alder-
men and burgesses from all obligations of this
nature, undertaking to guard church fugitives at
their own risk.

Fordwick claimed, about 1345, that if any
freemen or strangers, charged with felony, fled
to a church within the liberty, the mayor and
community were not to incur any damage if the
suspected felon escaped within the forty days.
But if at the end of the forty days, or before,
he wished to abjure the liberty, the mayor,
bailiff, and jurists were to lead him to the
boundary of the town's liberty, and there he
was to make the customary abjuration of the
realm. At Dover the fugitive desiring to

Q

242 SANCTUARIES

forswear the land had to do so at the church
door before the mayor. At Hastings he took the
oath in the presence of the baihff at " the style-
grees of the churche yerde . . . and anon he
shall receve the crosse, and the bayle shall doo
crye in the kynges behalf that no person uppon
payne that is in the lawe ordeyned, do hym
hurte ne griffe al the whyle he holde the kinges
way, forging to the porte of his passage that he
hath chosen."

The Rye custom was much the same ; the
fugitive had to take the abjuration oath seated
on the churchyard stile.

The City of London took upon itself in
1298 to decline responsibility for fugitives in
churches, but the judges considered this dis-
claimer contrary to law.

It may here be added that occasional entries
in Coroner's Rolls, show that the custom of the
actual abjuration being administered at the
churchyard gate was one of general adoption.
I have noted it entered in cases at Fordham,
Cambridgeshire, in 1338; at Frumpington, in
the same county, in 1343; and at Spalding,
Lincolnshire, in 1355.

CHAPTER XII

EPISCOPAL REGISTERS

Worcester — Hereford — London — Durham — Winchester

Chichester— Ely.

Almost the only occasion on which a diocesan
would be called upon to take action in connec-
tion with the question of sanctuary would be
those occasions wherein this momentous privi-
lege of the Church was infringed. The following
extracts or abstracts from the episcopal registers
of the mediasval Church of England are all, with
one exception, concerned with the punishment
of sanctuary violators.^ The first of these, of
the thirteenth century, illustrates the grave
character of the penalties incurred by such delin-
quents ; whilst the last, of the latter half of the
fifteenth century, shows how the conflict between
the JUS ecclesiasticum and tht jus regni was at that
time developing.

In the important register of Godfrey Giffard,
Bishop of Worcester from 1 263-1 301, there
are one or two remarkable entries relative to
sanctuary.

In 1279 the bishop presided in his cathedral

' Some extracts from the York episcopal registers are given under
Beverley.

244 SANCTUARIES

church at a long inquiry as to the execution by
Peter de la Mare, Constable of Bristol Castle, of
one William de Lay, a fugitive to the church of
Sts. Philip and James, Bristol. Richard Walden,
clerk, gave evidence that Peter the Constable
gave orders for the arrest of William in the
churchyard, and himself laid hands on the fugi-
tive. Four laymen testified to taking part in
the arrest, one of them stating that he took the
said William when fleeing to the churchyard,
and held him by the feet while the rest of his
body was in the churchyard, and that he left
because of the clamour of the people. Adam le
Steor, keeper of the castle prison, acknowledged
to beheading William. He did so, as he stated,
because the said William had often been in prison ;
but he well knew he was dragged there from the
churchyard. Another witness owned to having
tied the hands of the prisoner, led him to the
place of execution, and afterwards carried the
body out of the castle. Peter de la Mare, the
Constable of the castle, stated that he was not
present at the arrest, but acknowledged that he
was responsible for the arrest and beheading.
Robert, rector of the church of St. Mary, Bristol,
gave remarkable evidence ; he stated that he
was ignorant who composed, wrote, and pub-
lished a certain libellous song ; but that he had
heard of miracles being done by William de Lay.
The bishop, on 21st August, assigned the
following penances : Richard de Walden, clerk,

EPISCOPAL REGISTERS 245

the principal author of the arrest, and four
others who took an active part, were to exhume
the body of the said WiUiam and restore it to
the church, together with the head, burying it
in the churchyard from whence it had been
violently taken when living. At which exhu-
mation, carrying and burying, Adam le Steor,
who beheaded the said William, was to be pre-
sent and do the principal work. They were to
go from the church of the Friars Minors by the
most public way to the church of Sts. Philip
and James in solemn procession, with bare heads
and feet, and wearing only their shirts and
breeches, before the third hour of the day, on
four market days in four weeks, and at the door
of the church to be scourged by priests specially
appointed. The rest of the ten men who had
taken some part in the arrest, imprisonment, and
beheading were to make a like procession and
be scourged on one market day.

Peter de la Mare was to do like penance on
one day, was to endow a priest with fit main-
tenance to perform divine service for ever in
honour of God and His Mother and all the
elect, and more especially in remembrance of the
deceased. He was also to erect a stone cross at
the cost of at least iocs., that so the Church of
Christ built in His blood might be recompensed
with due reverence for so grave a crime ; and
that ai the same cross every year a hundred poor
were to be fed, and each of them should receive

246 SANCTUARIES

one penny for food at the expense of the said
Peter ; and further, that he should be present at
the penances of all the other offenders.

If, however, the said persons would take
upon them the sign of the cross (i.e. join the
Crusades), the bishop might mitigate the above
punishments, so that they went to the church in
the manner abovesaid and humbly received such
discipline. Two days later the bishop issued a
further notification, to the effect, that if Peter de
la Mare, Richard Walden, and their colleagues
sent one of themselves at their own expense, or
some other sufficient man-at-arms, to the Holy
Land for the remission of their sins, nothing
further should be exacted from them for the
Crusade.^

This reburial in consecrated ground of
William de Lay had a singular sequel. Many
of the people of Bristol regarded him as a
martyr, and went to his grave in the churchyard
of Sts. Philip and James as though he had been
a saint. The bishop issued his mandate to the
Archdeacon of Gloucester and the Dean of West-
bury to inquire into this, and to punish the
rectors of Sts. Philip and James and of the Blessed
Mary-in-the-Market for stirring up scandal and
errors with regard to William de Lay. At the
same time, the archdeacon and dean were ordered
to receive back into the Church Peter de la Mare
and his accomplices, if fitly penitent.^

1 Giffard's Registers, i. ff. 110-113. ' Ibid., ii. ff. 93-5.

EPISCOPAL REGISTERS 247

In 1283 there was a gross violation of
ecclesiastical immunities at Little Comberton.
A certain fugitive was taken by force out of
the church, incited thereto by the bailiff of the
hundred of Pershore and the reeve of Wick.
At the same time the mob withdrew the priest
and the parish clerk from their houses in the
churchyard (probably as abettors of the fugitive
taking sanctuary), and put them all three in
prison at Worcester. For this outrage all con-
cerned were excommunicated, and the bishop
issued his mandate to the deans of Worcester,
Gloucester, Bristol, Pershore, and Warwick,
enjoining the public scourging of the delin-
quents, bareheaded, and wearing only their
shirts and breeches, through the market-places
of those five towns. ^

In the Sede Vacante Register (f. 15), for
February 1302—3, entry is made by a letter
from the Prior of Worcester to the dean (rural)
of Worcester, enjoining him to excommunicate
all those concerned in the pursuing of Richard
Kaye, a clerk of Worcester, who had sought
ecclesiastical immunity, into the crypt of the
cathedral church, and to cite them to appear
before the prior to receive canonical punishment.
It appears from a memorandum attached to the
letter that Kaye was a fugitive within the pre-
cincts, and that on the day in question he went
to drink at the house of a goldsmith in the

1 Giffard's Registers, ii. ff. 169-70.

248 SANCTUARIES

cemetery. Immediately this was perceived by
the watch set by the baiUffs, they fortified the
gate between the cemetery and the church, and,
by the advice of the bailiffs, seized him and put
him in irons. He must have been restored to
the church, for eventually he abjured the realm
before the coroner.

Thomas de Cantilupe, Bishop of Hereford,
visited the priory of Leominster in 1 276. This
house, which was a cell of the great Abbey of
Reading, was semi-independent and constantly
gave trouble to the diocesan. On 27th March
the bishop followed up his formal visitation by
writing a long letter of reformanda to the prior
and convent, forbidding them to lock the church
doors, and so prevent access to the nave for
parochial uses. He also enjoined that the church
was not to be used for secular purposes on Holy
Days, and the use of the bells was not to be
stopped, nor almsgiving curtailed. The bishop,
in his remonstrance, further pointed out that the
locking of the gateway which led to the church
was to the detriment of those who might be
flying to the church for the purpose of obtaining
sanctuary rights.^

Adam de Orleton, Bishop of Hereford, issued
a commission on 12th February 1318, to the
Prior of Monmouth, the Dean of Ircheenfield,
the vicar of the church of Castle Goodrich, and
Master Richard de Sidenhale, for the purpose of

' Cantilupe's Register, f. 17.

EPISCOPAL REGISTERS 249

enquiring, reforming, correcting and punishing
those sacrilegious persons who had violated the
sanctuary of the conventual church of Mon-
mouth, by dragging forth Walter Herberd who
had taken refuge therein.^

In 1299, an appeal was made to the king by
that strenuous diocesan, Richard de Swinfield,
Bishop of Hereford, to cause John le Berner,
clerk, to be replaced by the sheriff in the church
of the Austin friars at Ludlow. John had fled
there, when in fear of death, claiming immunity,
but certain of the men of that town dragged
him forth with violence, and, after inflicting
various injuries, loaded him with chains, and
sent him to the castle of Shrewsbury, where
he was still in gaol. The nature of John's
alleged offence is not stated ; the bishop simply
claims his release and replacement in sanctuary,
in accordance with the laws of ecclesiastical
liberty.^

A few years later the same diocesan made
an appeal to his brother prelate, the Bishop of
Llandaff, to punish certain sanctuary violators
within his diocese by subjecting them to the
penalty of the greater excommunication. From
this vigorous letter it appears that a grievous
scandal had arisen, which, if left unpunished,
could not fail to be regarded as subversive of
the immunity of churches and a pernicious
example to others. One Griffin Goht and

' Alton's Register, f. i7- ^ Swinfield's Register, 125 b.

250 SANCTUARIES

others of LlandafF diocese had entered armed
through the two doors of the church of Mon-
mouth, breaking them open with the utmost
violence, and in spite of the remonstrances and
inhibition of the ministers of the church, had
seized one John le Carpenter, who had escaped
from custody out of Monmouth Castle and
taken refuge in the church, dragged him forth,
and inhumanly beheaded him as soon as he was
outside the churchyard. On the same date,
17th March 1308-9, Bishop Swinfield com-
missioned John of Monmouth, Bishop of LlandafF,
to perform on his behalf the rites of reconcilia-
tion for the church and churchyard of Mon-
mouth, as all religious offices had been suspended
owing to the pollution caused by the crimes of
Griffin Goht and his associates in Monmouth/

A third case of the violation of sanctuary
rights occurs in Swinfield's Register. On 17th
February 1311-12, the bishop, who was then in
poor health, commissioned Leoline Bromfield,
Bishop of St. Asaph, to consecrate altars and to
confirm children on his behalf, and at the same
time authorised him to reconcile the church and
churchyard of Clun, which had been desecrated
by the murder of a fugitive profanely dragged
from sanctuary.^

The earliest of the extant registers of the
diocese of London is that of Ralph Baldock,
who ruled over the see from 1304— 13 13. In

^ Swinfield's Register, f. 165. " Ibid., f. 175.

EPISCOPAL REGISTERS 251

December 1309, the bishop caused to be entered
in his register a strong denunciation of a breach
of sanctuary, which he declared, in the pre-
amble, to be contrary to the authority of the
Constitution of Ottobone, whereby the violent
ejection of fugitives from English churches or
churchyards was absolutely forbidden. Certain
prisoners had escaped from the gaol of Col-
chester Castle, and had made good their flight
to the Austin priory of Tiptree, about ten miles
distant, where they took refuge within the
conventual church. An unruly mob followed
them, burst open the doors with violence, and
dragged them forth through the midst of the
cloisters, eventually replacing them in the gaol
from which they had escaped. The bishop
stated that it is impossible to overlook such an
execrable act which was enormously prejudicial
to ecclesiastical liberties, and he ordered that a
solemn excommunication was to be pronounced
in every church of the deanery of Colchester
against the offenders, on the Saturday of the
Feast of the Conversion of St. Paul, on the fol-
lowing Sunday, and on the day of the Purifica-
tion of the Blessed Virgin, at the hour when the
largest congregation was wont to assemble. A
little further on in the register, entry is made of
a royal writ issued by Edward II. on 3rd March
1309, addressed to William de Ormesby, John
de Breton, and John de Mutford, justices ap-
pointed for the delivery of Colchester gaol,

252 SANCTUARIES

requiring them, in answer to the request of the
bishop, to restore one Roger Wyther of Eves-
ham to the priory church of Tiptree. The cir-
cumstances of the case are briefly related in the
writ, from which it would appear that Roger
was lying chained in Colchester gaol. As there
was more than one prisoner who had escaped
and gained sanctuary at Tiptree, it is probable
like writs were issued in the other cases, but
that the bishop's scribe thought that it was suffi-
cient to copy one of the writs as an example/

On 2 1 St November 1 3 1 2, Richard Kellaw, the
energetic Bishop of Durham (131 1-16), issued his
mandate to the Archdeacon of Durham for the
excommunication, through all the churches and
chapels of the archdeaconry, of certain sons of
iniquity who had with violence dragged forth
from the church of the Carmelite friars of New-
castle several who had therein sought sanctuary.
In connection with this outrage, the bishop took
particular action on 25th April in the following
year, when he issued a mandate to the parish
chaplain of St. Nicholas, Newcastle, imposing
public penance on Nicholas, called Le Porter,
for taking part in ejecting certain laymen out
of the Carmelite church, who had taken refuge
there for the security of their lives. Nicholas
had been excommunicated, but on the authority
of the Papal legate had been, after full confes-
sion, absolved, on condition of doing due penance.

^ Baldcock's Register, f. 20.

EPISCOPAL REGISTERS 253

It was ordered that on the next Sunday, and
on all successive Sundays of the current year,
Nicholas was to present himself at the doors
of the church of St. Nicholas, bareheaded, bare-
footed, and clad only in a sheet {roba linea),
there to receive castigation in the midst of the
people, and expressing in the vulgar tongue
the nature of his offence and his sorrow for it.
Afterwards he was to proceed in like manner to
the Carmelite church of St. Mary, there to make
like confession and to receive similar chastisement.
If, however, the prior of the Carmelites should
be satisfied with a less continuous penance, it was
left to the bishop to make certain remissions.

It is not a little remarkable that this letter of
the bishop is immediately followed in the register
by another one, wherein a penance of much shorter
duration was enjoined, without any mention of
the prior of the Carmelites. This second letter
is of the same date as the first, and addressed to
the same chaplain. It seems probable that some
private intimation was conveyed that this most
severe penance was to be wound up at Whitsun-
tide, Whitsunday falling that year on nth May.
The porter was ordered to make his penance in
like manner as in the first letter, before the doors
of St. Nicholas Church on the Monday, Tuesday,
and Wednesday in Whitsun week, and subse-
quently, on each of those three days, to do the
like before the doors of the cathedral church of
Durham.

254 SANCTUARIES

There is yet further reference to this out-
rage in an episcopal letter, dated 7th June 13 14,
wherein Robert de Luda, who had connived at
the dragging of certain laymen two years before
out of sanctuary in the Carmelite church, and
the subsequent putting of them to death, is ab-
solved from excommunication, subject to the
fulfilment of the stipulated penance ; but in this
case the nature of the public penance is not
stated.

In 1 315, Bishop Kellaw commissioned the
prior of Holy Island to inquire concerning a
violation of sanctuary. One William le Spyder,
of Berwick, in fear of violence, sought refuge in
the parish church of Norham. Whereupon John
Tyllok, William Godard, William Kinkly, and
Walter Russel entered the church, and dragged
the fugitive out, and conveyed him to the castle
of Norham, where he was detained for some
time.

William Wykeham, the great' Bishop of Win-
chester, was stern in maintaining the sanctuary
privileges of the Church, which so materially
alleviated the severity of the medieval criminal
law. One of the most curious cases recorded in
his register refers to an incident in connection
with the parish church of Overton. On a
Sunday evening, about Michaelmas, 1390, one
John Bentley was attending evensong. He was
known to be a stranger, and from his excitement
was judged to be there for sanctuary purposes.

EPISCOPAL REGISTERS 255

He was asked if he was a thief or a robber, and
he replied that he was neither, but had had the
misfortune to kill a man. Bentley then went out
into the churchyard, and whilst there was hailed
by one Robert Dingle, who was standing by the
open south gate. Whilst speaking to Dingle,
a shoemaker of Overton suddenly pushed him
from behind out of the churchyard into the high-
way. Bentley struggled to re-enter, but some of
the villagers dragged him away, put him in the
stocks, and afterwards took him to Winchester
gaol. The case was reported to the bishop, who
issued a commission to his official, in conjunction
with the prior of St. Swithun's and the abbot of
Hyde, to punish the offenders and compel them
to replace Bentley in sanctuary. At the same
time the bishop petitioned the king for Bentley's
discharge from gaol. The outcome of this case
is not to be gathered from the register, but,
judging from a somewhat similar case in the
diocese four years later, the penance would be
a severe one. The offenders who had violated
sanctuary at Streatham had to endure the fol-
lowing penance on three successive Sundays :
They walked in the procession stripped to
their shirts and drawers, carrying lighted tapers.
One of the clergy, clad in a surplice, followed,
flagellating them with a rod, and declaring to
the people at the same time the cause of the
penance ; after which the penitents knelt in the
middle of the church at high mass, repeating

256 SANCTUARIES

the Magnificat in audible voices and praying
forgiveness/

The authorities of a church when sanctuary
was claimed were expected to provide the offender
with necessary food. In a case where this was
neglected, in 1 377, Wykeham did not hesitate
to excommunicate those responsible for this
grave breach of sanctuary law.

The register of Robert Reade, Bishop of
Chichester from 1397 to 141 5, contains some
interesting entries relative to sanctuary violation
at Arundel : —

" Be it remembered that on 6th March
(1404-5), at Duringwick, there came certain
men, John May and John Cook, of Arundel, for
and about this reason — that it was common talk
and rumour that these same men had dragged
away one John Mott, who had been taken as a
thief and robber, and brought down to the Castle
of Arundel and its prison on 20th February, as
he was running from the aforesaid castle, and at
the cloister gates of the College of Arundel was
taking hold of the ring of the same gate as a sign
of the immunity of the Church. Who appear-
ing of their own accord, and being sworn to speak
the truth on the aforesaid charges laid against
them by the lord, simply denied what was alleged
as the charge was laid. They confessed, how-
ever, that they had gone across with the constable
there, who led and drew him away from the

' Victoria History oj Hampshire, ii. 40.

EPISCOPAL REGISTERS 257

place mentioned, for the greater security of the
said constable, and that they led him to the castle
aforesaid, and that considering the fact that they
were present at this abduction, giving their
advice and support, which was, as they learnt
since, to the prejudice of the privileges of the
Church, they submitted themselves to the grace
of the lord, because they were moved thereto in
their own consciences.

" Whereupon the said John and John were
sworn to abide by the mandate of the Church,
and to perform such penance as should be laid on
them and on each of them by the lord for their
offences. The lord then absolved them in legal
form, and enjoined each of them to make a pil-
grimage on foot to the shrine of St. Richard, and
to offer there a wax candle according to their
means, and that each of them should be scourged
five times through the church of Arundel ; and
further, that each of them before leaving his said
chapel (at Duringwick) should say there on his
bended knees before the crucifix five times,
Our Father, Hail Mary and Creed. And after-
wards the lord being informed that the said John
Mott had been restored to the Church as a
fugitive by the deliberate action of those who
had withdrawn him, after they had been made
aware that they had offended against the privilege
of the Church, and without the request of any
ecclesiastical person, he graciously commuted
the penance concerning the scourgings laid on

258 SANCTUARIES

them to this, namely, that each of them should
offer on the next Sunday, or on the day of the
Annunciation next to come at the time of High
Mass, a lighted candle at the High Altar of the
college aforesaid. Present then and there Mr.
John Pedenelle and Sir John Asscheford and
John Blounham."

In connection with the same offence, there
appeared on the following 29th March, before
the bishop in the chapel of his manor, John
North, constable, William Carlus, porter of
Arundel Castle, and a certain David Brown,
humbly submitting themselves for their share in
violently dragging away John Mott from sanc-
tuary and taking him to the castle, whereby they
had ipso facto incurred the sentence of greater
excommunication. Each of them took an oath
on the Holy Gospels of abiding by the mandates
of the Church and performing any enjoined
penance, whereupon the bishop absolved them
and ordered a penance nearly similar to that laid
on the two other offenders. But afterwards he
commuted the penance, allowing them to ride
to Chichester to make their offering of a wax
candle at the shrine of St. Richard at Arundel
on Good Friday, Easter Eve, or Easter Day, as
though they were doing it out of devotion.^

The register of William Gray, Bishop of Ely,
records the appointment, in January 1458—9, of
the Prior of Ely and Dr. Laverok, as commissaries

' Reade's Register, pp. 106-7 ; Stcssex Arch. Coll., vol. viii.

EPISCOPAL REGISTERS 259

to inquire into the case of John Ansty, Esquire,
William Wighton, and Thomas Warwick, who
had dragged forth from the immunity of the
cathedral church one Henry Mullyng, who had
fled thither for sanctuary, and placed him in
prison ; whereupon they were excommunicated
by the bishop. Wishing, however, whilst guard-
ing the! immunity of the church, to provide for
the health of the souls of the delinquents, the
commissaries were instructed to inquire into the
case and to deal with it. John Ansty, in defence,
pleaded that the taking away of Henry from
the cathedral church was not a violation of the
liberties of the Church, and quoted certain
statutes which had been approved by the bishops
and clergy of the province. He argued for
himself and colleagues that they were in great
perplexity, and found themselves between hammer
and anvil, to wit, between the Jus eccksiasticum
and they'z/j regni ; by the former they ought to
be restored to the Church, but by the latter
(approved by Convocation) they ought to be in
gaol until the next sessions to answer charges of
felony. After two adjournments and much
nicety of arguments as to the respective weight
of canons and law, the bishop intervened and
ordered the keeper of his gaol at Berton, where
Henry Mullyng was in confinement, to produce
him on Thursday after the Feast of St. Gregory
(i2th March) before the commissaries in the
cathedral, so that Henry being thus at Hberty

26o SANCTUARIES

within the church, might either seek its immu-
nity in the form provided by statute, or return
to gaol. On which day, all the parties appearing,
John Ansty declared in detail the manner in
which Henry had sought the shelter of the
church, and because he distinctly refused to
state a legitimate reason for such action, and also
did not solicit the liberty of the church in the
prescribed form, he and his colleagues violently
dragged him away and placed him in custody as
being suspected of felonies. Whereupon the
commissioners asked Henry whether he was
willing to state reasonable cause before a coroner,
and to this he at last assented. Eventually he
first secretly and then publicly confessed that
he had lately killed his servant by beating him
with an iron instrument, had stolen a bay horse
worth 8s., and was an abettor and harbourer of
thieves and robbers ; wherefore he humbly and
resolutely asked to be admitted to the liberty of
the church of Ely. Whereupon the commissaries
granted him this admission. ^

' Gray's Register, f. 117 ; Ely Dioc. Remembrancer, December 1906,

CHAPTER XIII

THE PATENT AND CLOSE ROLLS

Pardon of an abjuror who had taken part in a duel — Grant of the
chattels of an abjuror — Pardon, for a fine of 300 marks, for a
Dorchester sanctuary seeker — Pardon for sanctuary violation in
Cornwall — Pardon of parish clerk of Tutbury for killing a sup-
posed sanctuary seeker — Violation of sanctuary at Stafford —
Restoration to sanctuary at Windsor — Restoration to sanctuary
at Chichester — Commission as to beheading of sanctuary men at
Windsor — Restoration to sanctuary at Escrick, Yorks — Restora-
tion to sanctuary at Heacham, Norfolk — Commission as to vio-
lence to coroner and sanctuary seeker at Sedgeford, Norfolk —
Commission as to gross violation of sanctuary at Aylesbury —
Delivery to the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of
Worcester of a clerk in sanctuary at Ely cathedral — Pardon to a
sanctuary seeker at Cirencester for false oath — Violation of sanc-
tuary at Tutbury — Question of warding a sanctuary man at
Huntingdon — Sanctuary at St. Margaret's, Southwark.

In this short section abstracts are given of certain
noteworthy entries in the Patent and Close Rolls
at the Public Record Office pertaining to sanc-
tuaries, which do not readily find a place in
other chapters ; they are arranged in chronolo-
gical order, and seem to require no particular
comment. These extracts are chiefly taken from
the printed calendars : P at the beginning of
the paragraph stands for Patent, and C for Close.
In the first two cases it will be noted that
the actual fact of taking sanctuary is not named,
but abjuration of the realm was inseparable from
sanctuary seeking.

262 SANCTUARIES

P. 1213, "July II. — Pardon, on the petition
of Thomas de Galway, to Roger de Parks, for
having abjured our realm, which he did because
he assisted his brother Henry in a duel at Tothill
against the assize of the kingdom.

P. 1250, May zb. — Acquittance to Robert
de Grendon, sheriff of Stafford, for the payment,
by order of the king, to Simon, keeper of the
works of the castle of Windsor, on Thursday
after Holy Trinity, at Windsor, of 55s. of the
chattels late of Robert de Bandac, who abjured
the realm of England for larceny, and which
were found at Bridgenorth in the said county. ^

P. 1250, 'June 27. — Pardon to Elias de
Rabayne, for a fine of 500 marks, of what per-
tains to the king for his flight and taking sanc-
tuary in the church of Dorchester for certain
trespasses laid upon him, before John de Reygate
and his fellows, justices in eyre in the county of
Dorset, and of the trespasses of which he was
indicted before them in their eyre aforesaid, and
of the amercements for the same.

P. 1204, July ID. — Pardon, at the instance
of Eleanor the king's mother, to Robert de Ale-
burne, for the trespass which he committed with
others in dragging William de Waleys, charged
with the death of John, son of Matthew, from the
church of St. Kevern, Cornwall.

' Bridgenorth is, of course, in Salop and not in Staffordshire ;
this mistake of the scribe probably arose from the fact that Robert
de Grendon was at this time sheriff of both these counties.

PATENT AND CLOSE ROLLS 263

P. 1293, February 23. — Pardon to William
de Tyssington, clerk, for the death of William
de Lenton, porter of Tutbury Castle, as it ap-
pears by the record of John de Berewyk and his
fellows, justices in eyre in the county of Stafford,
that a thief imprisoned in the said castle having
escaped in the night, the porter, as soon as he
became aware of it, went immediately to the
church to prevent the thief from entering, and
believing the said clerk, who had also gone to
the church for the said purpose, to be the thief,
struck and wounded him ; and the said clerk,
likewise believing the porter to be the thief,
struck him back upon the head and so killed
him by misadventure.

C. I 300, November 7. — To William Inge and
Nicholas Fermband, justices appointed to deliver
Stafford gaol. The dean and chapter of St.
Mary's church, Stafford, have shown the king
that whereas Adam Coly and William de Offe-
legh lately fled to that church for sanctuary
by reason of certain trespasses ; their enemies
dragged them forth and delivered them to that
gaol ; the king orders them to be restored to the
church, if the justices find this to be true.

C. 1309, February 28. — To John de Foxle
and Richard de Wyndesore, justices assigned to
deliver the gaol of Wyndesore. Order to release
Hugh Ide and Simon le Webbe, and to safely
convey them to the churchyard {cimiterium) of
the church of Windsor, where they had fled for

264 SANCTUARIES

sanctuary. They had been forcibly taken thence
to Windsor prison on the information of the
Bishop of Sahsbury.

C. 1309, March 21. — To WilHam Inge and
John de Abernoun, justices, to dehver the gaol
of Chichester. Order to deliver Thomas Tryp
from gaol, and to lead him back to the church
of St. James without Chichester, whence he had
been forcibly taken from sanctuary.

C. 1309, April 4. — To the sheriff of Berk-
shire. Order to cause jurors to appear before
Henry Spigurnel and Richard de Wyndesor,
whom the king has appointed to inquire what
malefactors and breakers of the peace dragged
certain prisoners lately detained in the king's
prison of the town of Windsor for larcenies and
other trespasses charged against them, who had
escaped from the same prison and fled to the
churchyard of Windsor for sanctuary, from the
said churchyard by force of arms, and led them
back to the same prison, slaying and beheading
certain of them on the way back, and to inquire
the names of those thus slain and of the sur-
vivors, and all the circumstances of the same.

C. 1309, October 2 z^. — To John de Insula and
John de Donecastre, justices assigned to deliver
the gaol of York Castle. Order to deliver Nicholas
de Shupton from the said gaol, and to cause him
to be led back to the church of Escrick, if they
find that, as he states, he, being in the gaol for
larceny, escaped from it and fled to the said

PATENT AND CLOSE ROLLS 265

church for sanctuary, and that certain male-
factors dragged him therefrom and led him back
to gaol.

C. 1 3 10, Marc/i 28.— To Wm. de Ormesby
and Wm. Inge, justices to deliver the gaol of
Bury St. Edmunds. Order to lead Thomas
Heneman back to the church of Heacham if
they find that his complaint to the king be true,
he alleging that he fled to the said church for
sanctuary, and that certain malefactors took him
out of the same and led him back to the said
gaol.

P. I 3 1 1 , November 27. — Commission to John
de Thorpe and Robert Baynard on learning that
when John Alisaundre of Ringstede, who was
indicted for larceny, robbery, and other felonies,
took sanctuary in the church of Sedgeford, co.
Norfolk, and remained there for a long time,
and Henry de Walpole, coroner for the county
of Norfolk, approached the church to receive
his abjuration according to custom, divers persons
obstructed the coroner in the discharge of his
office, forcibly broke the church and entered it
by night, compelled John Alisaundre to go forth
from it, and beat the men appointed to guard
him in the church.

P. 12^2, December 13. — Commission to John
de Alveton, John le Venour, and Thomas de
Weston to make inquisition in the county of
Buckingham, touching an information that
Augustine Bever and others, who have formed

266 SANCTUARIES

a sworn confederacy to maintain their illicit
misprisions, assaulted John de Colynton, steward
of Eleanor, Countess of Ormond, the king's
kinswoman, at Aylesbury, followed him as he
fled to the church of that town to have eccle-
siastical defence there, broke the doors and
windows of the church upon him, took him
from the church, and imprisoned him until he
made a writing obligatory of _^ioo, and a writing
of quit-claim of certain trespasses to them, and
swore that he would serve the countess no longer,
assaulted other of her men and servants so that
she lost their service for a long time, and are
now common malefactors — to certify the king of
the whole truth hereof.

P. 1343, January 25. — On behalf of John
Wentynburgh, clerk, who for certain trespasses
laid to his charge by his enemies, not involving
loss of life or limb, has for a long time held
himself in the cathedral church of Ely, and dare
not leave that church on account of the plots
and threats of his said enemies, petition has been
made to the king for relief herein ; and as J.,
Archbishop of Canterbury and R., Bishop of
Worcester have mainprised before him and the
council to have the said John before them when
summoned, he has appointed Robert Flambard,
his serjeant-at-arms, to go to the said church,
take him out if he seeks him, and deliver him to
the custody of the said archbishop and bishop as
such mainpernors.

PATENT AND CLOSE ROLLS 267

P. 1345, February 20. — Whereas Walter
Beket of Cirencester, for fear of his enemies,
who were ambushed against him, fled to the
church of St. John Baptist, Cirencester, and
when his enemies would have drawn him
thence unless he acknowledged some felony to
save his life, acknowledged that he had killed
one John de Flete, who is still alive, as is said,
and afterwards escaped from the church, the
king, on trustworthy evidence of the truth of the
premises, and that the malice aforesaid was
planned against Walter on account of a prose-
cution by him made for the king, and not for
any fault of his, has pardoned him for the death
and escape aforesaid, and all other trespasses
whatsoever, and of any consequent outlawries.

P. 1 347, November 20. — Commission to
Simon Bassett, sheriff of Gloucester, Walter le
Waryner, and Robert de Orcheston, reciting
that, whereas the king, because John Pouchet,
" Lumbard," his enemy, with jTioo of his money
delivered to the said John by the hands of
Master Bernard le Saltu, king's clerk, to do
certain business for the king, lies hid and runs
to and fro, refusing to satisfy him of the money,
by writ directed the said sheriff to take him and
bring him before the council ; and the sheriff",
when the said John should come out of the
church at Tutbury, in which on that account
he kept himself, would have done so, certain
evildoers took John by force from the church

268 SANCTUARIES

with the king's money to let him go free, and
that the king has appointed them to find by
inquisition the names of all those concerned in
the taking of him from the church.

P. 1353, October 3. — The men of the com-
monalty of the town of Huntingdon have made
petition to the king shewing that Richard de
Dalton, lately convicted of felony before Robert
de Thorpe and his fellows, justices appointed to
deliver the gaol of Huntingdon, and adjudged to
death, and delivered to the ministers of the sheriff
for execution of the judgment, escaped from their
custody on the feast of St. Margaret, and fled to
the church of St. Andrew, Huntingdon, and still
holds himself there, and that they, fearing that,
in case he escape from the church, they may be
disturbed, have hitherto caused the church to be
guarded at heavy cost, not without depression of
their estate, and praying that they may be dis-
charged of such guard ; and because on delibera-
tion had thereon with justices and others of the
council, it seems that they should not be charged
with the keeping of the escaped felon, for whose
escape the sheriff has to answer the king, he has
thought good that they may be discharged of the
said guard.

P. 1 44 1, February i. — Whereas on the suppli-
cation of Thomas Homnall, alias Staynes, of
Bury St. Edmunds, yeoman, the king has
learned that on 6th February 1438, through
fear of arrest and imprisonment by reason of a

PATENT AND CLOSE ROLLS 269

condemnation in 372 marks, has taken sanctuary
in the church of St. Margaret, Southwark, and
there before Adam Levelord, one of the king's
coroners in the aforesaid county, confessed that
he was a felon, having on loth July, in the 14th
year, taken at Bury a red horse of one Edmund
Ampe, worth 20s., by colour of which on Satur-
day, 9th February, in the sixteenth year, before
the said coroner he abjured the realm, the king
has pardoned the said felony and any consequent
outlawry.!

1 Mr. Ralph Nevill, in commenting on this incident in Surrey
Archaeological Collections, vol. xxi., considered this was a case in
which a debtor, having gained sanctuary, put in a plea of horse
stealing, "which was doubtless entirely fictitious, but enabled him to
be conducted to the nearest port ; thence he proceeded abroad till
such time as he could arrange his affairs and purchase a pardon."
That there were cases of perjury before coroners to secure tranship-
ment out of the realm is undoubted, but that such a case of down-
right perjury of this character obtained a royal pardon is highly
improbable.

CHAPTER XIV

ASSIZE AND CORONERS' ROLLS

Pleas of the Crown, 1200-1225 — Coroners' Rolls from 1265 to 1413,
cited by Professor Gross — Staffordshire Assize Roll, 127 1-2 —
Derbyshire Assize Rolls of 1265-8 and 1329-30 — Wilts Assize
Roll, 1267-8 — Northumberland Assize Rolls of 1256 and 1279 —
Raids of Scotch robbers, and abjuration to their own country —
Dorsetshire Assize Roll of 1280 — Sanctuary at Kingston-on-
Thames, 1262-3 — Remarkable case at Wilton, 1358 — Two Ox-
ford incidents, ,1343 and 1346, from Coroners' Rolls — Coroners'
Rolls for the city of York, 1349- 1359 — Hertfordshire Assize Roll,
1247-8 — Somersetshire Assize Rolls, 1243 and 1280 — Devonshire
Assize Roll, 1237-8 — Assize Rolls of Cornwall, 1283-4 and
1302-3 — The nature of Assize Rolls, and of Coroners' Rolls.

The several series of the national rolls, in addi-
tion to the Patent and Close Rolls, stored at the
Public Record Office, contain valuable contem-
porary records as to the action of sanctuary
customs and laws. The most notable of these
are to be found in the Assize and Coroners' Rolls.
They also occur in the older Plea Rolls of the
Curia Regis. The first volume of the invaluable
publications of the Selden Society, issued in 1888
by the late Professor Maitland, was " Select Pleas
of the Crown, 1 200-1 225." In these pages are
the following references to pleadings involving
the question of sanctuary.

At the Pleas of Easter Term, 1203, Adam
Matherley appealed William of Witham, gold-
smith of Wallingford, for that he by night came

ASSIZE AND CORONERS' ROLLS 271

to the house of his lord, PhUip Crook, in the
township of Easton, and with other evildoers
fastened the doors of his house on the outside so
that neither Adam nor the other servants could
get out, and afterwards broke the doors of the
bedroom and slew Philip and robbed him of his
money. He saw this crime through a window,
and this he offered to prove against him by his
body. A day was appointed for wager of battle.
Meanwhile it was stated on the plea rolls that
" The knights of the county do not suspect
Edward, brother of Alfred, who placed himself
in sanctuary and abjured the realm, of having
consented to this crime."

At the Pleas at Bedford in 1202, there were
two instances of sanctuary recorded by the jurors
of the hundred of Flitt. Elias, Stanard's son,
slew Roger, son of Geoffrey, and fled to a church,
confessed, and abjured the realm. Judgment was
given against Robert of Marsh, the Serjeant, for
not summoning the hundred and the townships
to sit upon the dead man. Stanard of Eye was
in mercy for not raising the hue when his son
was found dead and slain. In the other case,
one of four men engaged in a murder fled to
a church and abjured the realm. His chattels,
worth 3s., were forfeited.

The jurors of the hundred of Oswaldston, at
the Pleas held at Worcester in 1221, stated that
Nicholas of Hagley and Stephen Read were
accomplices in larceny. Stephen on this account

272 SANCTUARIES

fled to a church. Nicholas wished to dehver
him, and went to Osbert Alfolk, of Alvechurch,
and asked him to go with him to dehver Stephen.
Osbert dechned, a quarrel ensued, with the
result that Osbert killed Nicholas. Whereupon
Osbert found pledges, six of whom are named,
and the whole of his tithing. Afterwards
Osbert demanded an inquest to say if he was
guilty of larceny and fellowship with Stephen
or no. The jurors found that Osbert was a
thief and a receiver of thieves, in particular
of Nicholas and Stephen, and slew Nicholas in
order to conceal his crimes. It was therefore
decided that Osbert be hanged.

Another complicated case at the same pleas
was that of William of Stone, who was captured
in his house by evildoers, taken off to Chaddesley
wood, and there slain. William Brasey, who
was present at the murder, and who was also
charged with the death of Philip of Harvington,
fled into the church at Stone and remained there.
The king's serjeant committed the duty of
seeing that he did not escape to the townships
of Stone, Heath, and Dunclent. But whilst they
had him in charge, the Abbot of Bordesley came
with his monks and carried Brasey off, clad in
the cowl of one of the monks. The townships
confessed this, and were therefore in mercy.
The justices also considered that the abbot was
in mercy. Meanwhile Isabel, William of Stone's
wife, had charged four other men with the

ASSIZE AND CORONERS' ROLLS 273

murder of her husband. They did not appear,
and the justices directed her to sue in the county-
court until they were outlawed, and ordered the
sheriff to take their lands and chattels into the
king's hand. But on the return journey of the
justices to Worcester the accused appeared again,
together with Isabel, denied their guilt, and
Isabel withdrew her appeal, with the result that
she herself was taken into custody. The accused
paid a fine of 20 marks for not having appeared
when first summoned.

A sanctuary case is recorded at the Pleas
held at Warwick in 1227. William Maynend
killed Jacob the merchant, fled to a church and
abjured the realm. William's chattels were
worth 5s., and the price of his land for the
king's term of a year and a day, 17s. Edith,
Jacob's wife, notwithstanding William's confes-
sion, charged another man, Ketel of Warwick,
with her husband's death, caused by a kick with
his foot. Ketel put himself on his country, and
gave five marks to have a verdict, pleading
William's attested confession in church. The
jurors declared Ketel was not guilty, and Edith
was taken into custody.

Another volume of the Selden Society, issued
in 1906, the work of the late Professor Gross, is
" Select Cases from the Coroners' Rolls, 1 245-
141 3," wherein occur the following sanctuary
references : —

At twilight on Saturday, the feast of St.

s

274 SANCTUARIES

Peter's Chains, 1265, an affray occurred on the
bridge of Hailbridge, between the counties of
Bedford and Huntingdon, when an attempt was
made to rob two women and a boy who were on
their way from the market of St. Neots to the
leper hospital at Sudbury. William, a shepherd,
came to their rescue, when John, one of the
felons, struck William with a sword on the
head, so that he forthwith died. The township
of Sudbury came with the hue and arrested John
and two others of the robbers ; but William,
son of Nicholas the preacher of Huntingdon,
clerk, escaped them and fled to the church of
Diddington, Huntingdonshire. The jury at the
inquest, before Simon Read the coroner, came
from the four townships of Sudbury, Eaton,
Wyboston, and Colmworth. The sword, worth
1 2d., was delivered to the township of Sud-
bury, and had to be accounted for at the next
assizes.

A curious case of murdering a sanctuary
fugitive, 612 route for his port, occurred two years
later at Sudbury. An unknown man, imprisoned
at Southoe, on the manor of the Earl of Glou-
cester, escaped from prison and fled to the church
of Southoe, where he abjured the realm before
the Huntingdon coroner, electing for himself
the port of Dover. He took the road to Sud-
bury and reached that place, but when there he
was pursued by three men of Hail Weston,
whose names are given ; they assaulted him

ASSIZE AND CORONERS' ROLLS 275

with swords, killed him, and afterwards, on the
king's highway, beheaded him with an axe.
The township of Sudbury raised the hue, and
pursued from township to township. At the
inquest the three culprits were ordered to be
arrested if found.

A later case in the same county is illustrative
of the fate that lawfully befell a licensed sanctuary
fugitive, on his way to the selected port, if he
left the highway. One John, who was hayward
in the vill of Houghton, was arrested in 1276
on suspicion of larceny, and was imprisoned by
the township of Houghton, in the liberty of
Eyton. He escaped from prison, and took refuge
on Monday next before the feast of St. Mark
in the parish church of Houghton. On the fol-
lowing Monday he confessed before the coroner
that he had robbed Sir William of Gorham
at Westwick, Hertfordshire, abjured the realm,
came forth from sanctuary and proceeded on
his way to Dover. He fled, however, from
the highway, and was followed by William of
Houghton, and eventually, on the hue and suit
of the whole vill, was beheaded by the township
of Houghton. The four vills of Houghton,
Totternhoe, Tilsworth, and Chalgrave, appraised
John's personal property, which was placed in
charge of the first of these vills.

In the same year a woman of the hundred of
Manshead killed her husband, found sanctuary,
confessed her crime before the coroner and the

276 SANCTUARIES

four adjoining vills, abjured the realm, and pro-
ceeded to Dover.

Certain extant Coroners' Rolls for North-
amptonshire, in the time of Edward II., name
the churches of St. Peter of Oundle, St. James
of Thrapstone, St. Andrew of Luddington, St.
Peter of Watford, and the chapel of St. Thomas
the Martyr in Oundle, as having been duly used
by sanctuary fugitives. Other churches occur
whose dedications are not set forth.

A remarkable Northamptonshire case oc-
curred at Cold Ashby in March 1322, when
John, the son of Simon Robert, the constable
of that vill, died from a lance wound. At the
inquest it was found that two days previously
two men who had enlisted at Northampton to
serve the king in Scotland came to Ashby,
where they found John, who had enlisted there.
A quarrel arose amongst them, when Richard,
son of William Clerk of Crick, ran a lance
through John, which eventually killed him.
Whereupon Richard and the other enlisted man
took refuge in the church of Ashby, but forth-
with the body of recruits from Northampton
who were on their way to join the king came
and took these two men by force of arms from
the church and carried them off with them to
Scotland. The record of the inquest concludes
with the statement that John lived for two days,
and then died after having confessed and received
the Communion.

ASSIZE AND CORONERS' ROLLS 277

In the same month and year a Northampton-
shire example of sanctuary affords another illus-
tration of the fate likely to befall a licensed fugi-
tive who wandered from the highway. John
of Ditchford fled to the church of Wootton
on account of robbery, which he confessed
before the coroner and the four townships, and
on abjuring the realm had the port of Dover
assigned to him. Two days later his body was
found beheaded in the fields of Collingtree. The
inquest returned that "on the preceding Wednes-
day the said John abjured the realm of England
before the coroner at Wootton, and on the same
day he abandoned the king's highway and the
warrant of holy Church, to visit the cross, and
fled over the fields of Collingtree towards the
woods. Hue was raised against him, and he
was pursued by the township of Wootton and
others, until he was beheaded while still fleeing.
His head was carried by the four townships to
the king's castle at Northampton by order of
the coroner."

One other Northamptonshire case, of the
days of Richard II., is worth citing as showing
the power of a church fugitive to insist on
his safety and maintenance for the full term
of forty days. One John Philpot, in 1377, took
refuge in the Cluniac monastery of St. Andrew
in Northampton, and there in the chapel of St.
Mary, on the day of his arrival, confessed on
oath before the two coroners of the town of

2/8 SANCTUARIES

Northampton that he was a thief, having stolen
a grey horse worth los. at Kirkby, in Warwick-
shire ; and also that he was a murderer, having
slain John Pigger, poulterer of Highgate, on
29th November 1367. "Being asked if he
wished to abjure the realm of England, he said,
not until the fortieth day. Therefore on behalf
of the king, the said coroners ordered the bailiffs
to cause the town to guard him there safely and
securely. And during the interval of forty days
the said John Philpot escaped from the said
monastery, and fled to some unknown place.
He had no chattels."

The old Assize Rolls frequently yield abun-
dant proof as to the extent and working of
the ordinary privilege of sanctuary within a
parish church or consecrated chapel. The
Staffordshire Assize Roll for the year 1 271-2, at
the close of the reign of Henry III., contains a
variety of instances, none of them based upon any
royal charter, but upon the general custom of
the country, and the privileges of the Church
throughout Christendom.^

Simon Wade put himself in the church of
Bradley, confessed himself a robber, and abjured
the realm before the coroner ; his chattels were
worth 2S. gd., for which the sheriff answered ;
the vill of Bradley did not take him, and is
therefore in mercy. ^

' Mazzinghi's Sanctuaries, 35-42.
/.e ., subject to fine.

ASSIZE AND CORONERS' ROLLS ^79

Henry, son of Maud de Clifton and Hugh le
Fox, of Hoar Cross, were together on the bridge
beyond the wood of Lichfield, and a dispute
arising between them, the said Hugh struck the
said Henry with a club on the head to the brain,
of which he instantly died ; Hugh put himself
in the (cathedral) church of Lichfield, and ab-
jured the realm before the coroner ; he had no
chattels. William Godley the first finder came
not, and was attached by Robert, son of Godfrey
of Lichfield, and by Gilbert, son of Geoffrey of
the same place, and was therefore in mercy.
Afterwards it was testified that Maud, the mother
of the said Henry, charged the said Hugh in the
county court with the death of her son, and he
was outlawed at her suit.

Robert Herberobur, clerk, put himself in the
church of Tamworth, acknowledged himself to
be a robber, and abjured the realm before
the coroner ; his chattels were worth 3s. Also
Walter de Herberobur put himself in the church
at Tamworth and made like acknowledgment
and abjuration. He had no chattels, and the
twelve jurors made no mention of his abjuration,
and for this informality they were in mercy.

William, son of Alan, put himself in the
church of Burton-on-Trent, acknowledged him-
self a robber, and abjured before the coroner.
He had no chattels, and the vill of Burton was
in mercy for not arresting him.

Robert Culkyng put himself in the church

28o SANCTUARIES

of Rugeley, and abjured the realm before the
coroner ; his chattels were 5s. id. ; the vill
of Rugeley failed to arrest him, and they were
therefore in mercy.

Adam Tulk, of Alton, put himself in the
church of Colwich, and afterwards came to the
king's peace, and went from the said church ;
but he was instantly taken and carried to Bridge-
north, and there imprisoned when Robert de
Grendon was sheriff. From thence he was
delivered by the king's writ, and the succeeding
sheriff was commanded to cause the said Robert
to be bailed, but the jurors testified that Robert
was dead.

Hugh Scott put himself in the church of
Tutbury, confessed himself a robber, and made
abjuration before the coroner ; his chattels were
3s. I lid.

John Brun put himself in the church of
Cheshall (.?), confessed to having committed
robberies and homicides, and abjured the realm
before the coroner ; his chattels were worth 3s.
The vill of Cheshall did not capture him, and
therefore was in mercy.

Nicholas, son of William de Colton, and
Adam, son of Hereward, were together in the
vill of Hutton. A dispute arose, when Nicholas
struck Adam with a knife to the heart, and
killed him instantly. He immediately fled,
put himself in the church of Colton, and there
remained from the first hour until night. Ralph

ASSIZE AND CORONERS' ROLLS 281

de Burgo would not permit the men of Colton
to guard him in the said church, and they say
upon oath that by the counsel and abetting of
the said Ralph, Nicholas departed from the
church, with the advice and assistance of William
le Jovene, lord of Colton. Subsequent measures
were to be taken with regard to the said Ralph
and William, but it was testified that iocs.
had been paid to the use of Haman le Strange,
the then sheriff for the aforesaid evasion. The
sheriff was then commanded to cause the said
Haman to appear before the justices. The
chattels of Nicholas were worth lad. The
vills of Colton, Bromley Abbots, and Bromley
Bagots, were in mercy for not coming to the
inquest.

Alice de Alegrave put herself in the church
of Shenstone, confessed to robbery, and ab-
jured the realm before the coroner. She had no
chattels. For failing to arrest her the vill of
Shenstone was in mercy.

Avice de Leek put herself in the church of
Weston, confessed to robbery, and abjured. She
too had no chattels, and the vill of Weston was
in mercy for not arresting her.

Richard de Miller put himself in the church
of Standon, confessed to robbery, abjured, had
no chattels, and the vill in mercy for failing to
arrest him.

Steven de Frucheton and Roger de Wemme
put themselves in the church of Creswell,

282 SANCTUARIES

confessed to robbery, abjured, had no chattels,
and the vill was fined for non-arrest.

Agnes de Bakelye put herself in the church
of St. Bertelin of Stafford, confessed herself a
robber, and abjured before Bertram de Burgh the
coroner. Her chattels were declared to be worth
1 2d., but afterwards it was testified that these
chattels belonged to Robert de Smith of Stafford,
through whose suit the said Agnes had put her-
self in the church.

Richard de Alton put himself in the church
of the Friars Minors of Stafford, confessed him-
self a robber, and made abjuration. He had no
effects. The vills which came not at first to the
inquest were in mercy.

A certain unknown Christian woman put
herself in the church of St. Chad, Stafford, con-
fessed to robbery, and abjured; her chattels were
worth I2d. ; the vill of Stafford was in mercy
because she was not arrested.

Alice le Blake of Sedgford put herself in the
church of Stafford (St. Mary's), and abjured the
realm before Bertram de Burgh the coroner.
Her chattels were worth 6d.

It will thus be seen that the cases of resort to
ordinary church sanctuaries amounted to twenty
in number for the county of Stafford in a single
year of the thirteenth century. Staffordshire was
among the smaller counties both in size and
population, but if the rest of the counties for
this year had a like number of sanctuary seekers,

ASSIZE AND CORONERS' ROLLS 283

the total would amount to about eight hundred.
This total is the more surprising, inasmuch as
it has to be remembered that the population of
England at that time would be less than a sixth
of what it is at the present day, and that such a
calculation excludes from consideration the large
numbers which year by year resorted to the special
sanctuaries which had chartered privileges.

The earliest Assize Roll for Derbyshire, cover-
ing the years 1265— 1268, is fairly prolific in cases
of this description.^

Agnes, daughter of Roger de Coventry, placed
herself in the church of Stanley, and acknow-
ledged herself to be a common thief, and abjured
the kingdom. Chattels worth 4d., for which the
sheriff will respond.

Thomas, son of the parson of the church of
Normanton, and Ranulph Seuche, slew Ranulph
le Poer in the open fields of Bentley, and imme-
diately after the deed placed themselves in the
church of Blackwell, and acknowledged the deed
and abjured the kingdom.

Philip de Coleshill and Alice de Beaurepayr
placed themselves in the church of Dovebridge
and acknowledged themselves to be thieves, and
abjured the kingdom. No chattels, but they
possessed 2^5. The vill of Dovebridge in mercy
for concealment.

Geoffrey, son of Nicholas le Charecter, slew
Will Wildegros in the vill of Somersall, and at

' See Derbyshire Archaological Society s Journal, voX. xviii. (1896).

284 SANCTUARIES

once fled to the church of Dovebridge, and
owned the deed and abjured the kingdom.
Chattels worth 2S. He was in the Frank
Pledge of Somersall, but they have him not (in
custody).

Hugh Textor placed himself in the church
of Darley, and confessed that he had slain Thomas
Quenyld, and abjured the kingdom before the
coroner. Chattels, 3s. He was in the frank
pledge of Nicholas de Wakebrugge, who now
had him not. And the 1 2 jurymen concealed
a certain part of the said chattels — wherefore
they are in mercy. And the vills of Darley,
Nether Haddon, and Winster, on the plea of
false valuation of the aforesaid chattels before
the coroner, are in mercy.

William de Middleton placed himself in the
church of Harthill, and confessed himself a thief,
and received John Bolax, and John (son of the
chaplain of Taddington), a robber, and abjured
the kingdom before the coroner. And because
the vill of Harthill did not take him, they are
in mercy. He was in the frank pledge of
Middleton in Wapentake of Wirksworth, but
they have him not. John Bolax and John, son
of the chaplain of Taddington, are extraneous
and outlawed.

Alan le Serjant of Hope slew Richard, son
of Abuse, with a certain knife, and placed him-
self in the church of Hope, and acknowledged
the deed and abjured the kingdom. He was iu

ASSIZE AND CORONERS' ROLLS 285

the frank pledge of Geoffrey, son of Brun of
Hope, who hath him not. In mercy.

Hugh de Somercotes, smith, placed himself
in the church of Alfreton, and acknowledged
that he slew Gilbert de Riddings, and abjured
the kingdom before the coroner. No chattels.
The vills of Alfreton, Wingfield, and Pinxton
came not to the coroner's inquest, wherefore they
are in mercy. It was afterwards testified by the
jury that the said Hugh was placed in straits
in the last iter, and outlawed in the country
because of his contumacy in the king's suit on
account of the aforesaid death. He was very
much commiserated in this county after the said
outlawry was promulgated. The whole county
was in judgment because they had not taken him.

Selections from the Assize Rolls of Derby-
shire for 4 Edward III. (1329-30) were printed
by the present writer in vol. xxxi. of the same
journal. These selections, taken from only two
membranes of the roll, include the following
three sanctuary cases : —

" John, son of Gregory, son of Simon of
Ingleby, slew Laurence Hereward, and immedi-
ately fled and is suspected. Tlierefore let him
be in exigent and outlawed. His chattels, worth
ajd., wherof J. Bret, the sheriff to answer. He
was not in the frank pledge, nor of the main-
past of any one, for he was a vagabond. And
upon inspection of the coroner's rolls it was found
that the said John betook himself to Ingleby

286 SANCTUARIES

church ; and it being asked the jury how he
withdrew from the said church, they say that
the said John, before W. de Tyssington the
coroner, acknowledged the felony and abjured
the realm. The said coroner hath no record of
the said abjuration on his rolls."

" Alan Shakestaffe struck Adam Halyfax
with a knife, upon which he immediately died,
and forthwith after the deed he betook himself
to the church of Monyash, and there before
the coroner acknowledged the aforesaid felony,
and abjured the realm. His chattels were worth
4d., whereof J. Bret the sheriff to answer."

" At Walton one Roger Losse, who was
taken and imprisoned in the stocks [in ceppis) of
the lady Joan de Mochant, escaped thence and
took refuge in Walton church & there before
the coroner acknowledged that he had stolen 2
oxen of one Roger Jacob of the same place and
abjured the realm. His chattels are worth
52s. 4d. for which J. Bret the sherifF to answer.
Nothing is adjuded of the escape because the
aforesaid Roger was not taken for the theft nor
at the suit of anyone for theft or any felony as
the jurors here witness but he was put in the
stocks for arrears of his accounts &c. and not for
any other cause."

But of all counties Wiltshire, I believe, bears
the palm in Henry HI.'s day for the great number
of abjurations.

The Assize Roll for that county of the year

ASSIZE AND CORONERS' ROLLS 287

1267—8 actually includes sixty-six cases of fugi-
tives to churches who abjured the realm. In
twelve cases the delinquents confessed to homi-
cide, and in the remainder to some form of
robbery. Six of these exiles were women, two
of them accomplices of their husbands.

The following are the churches in which
sanctuary claims were set forth at this single
assize : — Alderbury, Alvediston (2), Amesbury,
Ashton West, Avebury, Bavant, Bishopstowe,
Bishopstrow, Blundon St. Andrew, Box, Brad-
ford, Broad Hinton, Buttermere, Calne, Chil-
hampton, Chippenham (2), Chute, Collingbourne
Abbas (2), Coombe Bissett, Cricklade (2), Din-
ton, Easton, Fittleton, Hamptworth, Haytesbury,
Highworth, Hill Deverill, Hindon, Horningham,
Lacock, Laverstoke, Liddington (2), Manning-
ford, Malmesbury [St. Aldhelm] (2), Malmes-
bury [St. Mary], Marlborough (2), Norton,
Ogbourne St. George, Porton, Potterne (2),
Poulshot, Purton (2), Rodborne, Seagry, Shaw,
Sherston, Stratford St. Cross (2), Stratton, Sur-
rendell, Wanborough (2), Wilton (2), Winter-
borne Gunner, Winterslow, and Worton.

The Assize Rolls of Northumberland supply
a fair, number of instances of churches used as
sanctuaries, although this county was so situated
as to afford felons a variety of other comparatively
easy methods of escaping their deserts. On the
north lay the kingdom of Scotland, on the south
the palatinate of Durham, whilst there were also

288 SANCTUARIES

several small liberties where the ordinary King's
writ did not run. To the most celebrated of
these, " the Grithcross of Tynemouth," allusion
is elsewhere made. Among churches used as
sanctuaries, according to the Assize Roll of 40
Henry III. (1256), were those of Bamburgh,
Bolum, Corbridge (three times), Mitford, and
Rothbury, as well as the Newcastle churches of
St. John Baptist, St. James, St. Mary Magdalene,
St. Thomas, and the conventual church of the
Friars Minors.

The Assize Roll, 7 Edward I. (1279), records
cases of sanctuary in the churches of Alnwick (2),
Alwinton (2), Gunnerton, Hilderton, Lowick
and Whelpington. One of the Alnwick cases
here recorded is significant : Simon de Scotia of
Scotland was caught and imprisoned at Alnwick
for a certain cattle theft, and afterwards, in the
night time, he broke his prison, killed Robert
the castle gate-keeper, as well as Andrew the
Thresher, seized the keys of the gate, and opening
the door fled to the parish church of Alnwick.
When safe within its walls he confessed his
crimes before the coroner and abjured the realm.
The twelve jurors who assessed Simon's chattels
as worth I4d., concealed part of his goods, and
for this they were declared in mercy.

Mr. Page, who edited these Northumberland
rolls for the Surtees Society in 1891, states in
his preface that —

" Raids of Scotch robbers {jnalefactores ignoti

ASSIZE AND CORONERS' ROLLS 289

de Scotia) are constantly mentioned on these
rolls. The usual method of these raiders appears
to have been, probably when opposition was not
offered to them, to take all the members of a
household, bind them hand and foot, and then
ransack the house. There was little chance of
their being caught, but even should they not see
their way of immediately escaping back into Scot-
land, there was generally a church near by at
which they could take sanctuary, and as soon as
the coroner could be brought to them they ab-
jured the realm and made the best of their way
to their native country."

The following are among the instances of
criminals availing themselves of sanctuary rights
in a Dorsetshire Assize Roll of the year 1280.^

Robert de Code and Roger Paleyn were
quarrelling in a tavern, when Robert struck
Roger with a knife, and killed him instantly.
Robert at once fled to the church of St. Sampson
of Middleton (Milton Abbas), where he abjured
the realm before the coroner; chattels worth 3d.

Gerard, son of Robert de Hugham, placed
himself in the church of Motcombe, confessed
that he was a robber, and abjured the realm
before the coroner ; chattels worth i8d.

1 Ecclesiologists may not infrequently find the solution of doubtful
church dedications in Assize and Coroners' Rolls. It will be noticed
that certain dedications are entered on this Dorsetshire roll, and when
searching for instances for this work I found the church saints occa-
sionally mentioned on records of six or seven other counties, as well
as almost invariably in the county of Cornwall.

T

290 SANCTUARIES

Henry le Tayllur of Hine, Nicholas his son,
and John his son, broke into the house of
William le Tayllur in Gareston, and killed the
said William. Whereupon Henry placed him-
self in the church of St. Michael, and there con-
fessed that he had slain William, and abjured the
realm. His chattels were worth 2s. Nicholas
and John were taken before the justices.

John Furet and Roger le Trotter were quarrel-
ling in the village of Swyre, when the former
struck the latter with a knife so that he died.
John's chattels were worth 31s. 4d. ; he would
not be indicted, for he became a vagabond. But
afterwards John placed himself in the church of
St. Mary of Hiddynton (.? Hinton), and there
confessed to killing Roger, and abjured the realm.
The parishes of Puncknowle and Portesham came
not to the inquest and were at mercy.

William de Weston placed himself in the
church of Sydlyng, and there confessed that he
was a robber of sheep and had committed other
thefts, and abjured the realm before the coroner.
He had no effects.

The Surrey Assize Roll for 1262-3 supplies
two instances of the great church of Kingston-
on-Thames being used as a refuge by criminals.
Richard le Parmenter and John de Marscall
placed themselves in that church, acknowledged
that they were thieves and robbers, and abjured
the realm before the coroner. It was proved
before the jury that William de Punfreyt, clerk,

ASSIZE AND CORONERS' ROLLS 291

had been in the company of the aforesaid Richard
and John. WiUiam did not appear, and the
proctor of the Bishop of Winchester claimed
him as a cleric. In the same year Walter Rose
and Walter de Braunton, clerk, were caught by
the bailiffs of Kingston with two cows, two
heifers, and a horse which they had stolen.
They were placed in Kingston prison, but escaped,
when Walter de Braunton took sanctuary in the
parish church, and abjured the realm before the
coroner.

A Wiltshire Coroners' Roll for 1358 supplies
the following particulars from the long entry of
a curious sanctuary case at an inquest held at
Wilton before Robert Sireman, the borough
coroner, and Philip le Scryvein, the borough con-
stable.^ Roger de Ludynton was arrested at
Fuggleston, at the suit of Ralph, chaplain of the
church of St. Thomas, Salisbury, on Monday
before the feast of St. Barnabas, together with
William, another chaplain of St. Thomas, Salis-
bury, on a charge of felony. William, however,
fled to the church of St. Edith, Wilton, and,
after abiding there one night and one day,
escaped. Roger was led to the house of John
Bovedon, bailiff of the liberty of the Abbess of
Wilton, and imprisoned until Wednesday before
the feast of St. John Baptist, on which day he
was led by the bailiff to the court of the abbess

' A translation of this entry is given in IVi/is Notes and Queries
of September, 1898.

292 SANCTUARIES

held at Bullbridge before John Everard, her
steward. " But when the said Roger was
approaching the church of St. Peter of Bull-
bridge, the said John the bailiff led him as far as
the threshold of the gate of the chapel of St.
Thomas the Martyr in the same church, and
there made the said Roger sit down within the
bounds of Holy Church ; and afterwards, in the
interval of a short space, came Robert Porter,
vicar of the church of Bullbridge, and opened
the gate of the said chapel and drew Roger
within ; and because he was within the bounds
of the church seeking the refuge of Holy
Church, the execution of the aforesaid suit of
felony could not be. Roger abode in the church
until the following day, when the coroner came
and inquired the cause of his stay in the church ;
and the said Roger, in the presence of the
coroner, touching the sacred Evangels, acknow-
ledged that he had feloniously stolen a psalter,
worth ijs., in the church of St. Thomas, Salis-
bury, and feloniously carried it now six weeks
ago, and for that cause claimed the liberty and
refuge of Holy Church ; and sought from the
coroner license to abjure, and go forth from the
kingdom of England, according to the law and
custom of the same kingdom ; and thus con-
tinued the same confession before the same
coroner for three days continuously . . . and
abjured the kingdom ; and there was assigned to
the same Roger the port of Plymouth for his

ASSIZE AND CORONER'S ROLLS 293

passage. And there was taken with the same
Roger a psalter, a knife, and diverse woollen
garments, valued by the xij jurymen at xs.,
which goods remain in the charge of the Abbess
of Wilton, lady of the liberty aforesaid, so that
she answers thereof to the justices in Eyre."

It is quite obvious that it was the merci-
ful intention of the abbess to save this man's
life, and her official winked at his escape into
sanctuary.

Two interesting fourteenth century cases
of sanctuary seeking in Oxford occur in the
Coroners' Rolls of that town. The first instance
shows the escape of two felons after enjoying
sanctuary for nearly twenty days. The escape
was doubtless made to avoid the eventual neces-
sity of abjuration. The second instance is
remarkable for the repeated visits of the
coroners.

On Wednesday after the feast of St. Catherine
(25th November), 1343, Walter le Dodder and
Adam le Souter, two felons, broke out of the
gaol of Oxford Castle, and fled to the church
of the Friars Minors of that city. On the
said day the coroners went to the church, and
on questioning the felons, they admitted that
they were common thieves who had broken by
night from the castle prison. They said they
were unwilling to submit to the peace of the
king. Therefore the bailiffs of Oxford were
warned to set a watch that they did not escape

294 SANCTUARIES

from the church. But on Wednesday after the
feast of St. Lucy (13th December), they broke
the said church and escaped. On Wednesday
after the feast of St. Hilary (13th January), the
coroner held an inquest as to the escape of these
felons. The jurors returned that they had escaped
at night through defective watching.

It came to pass on Monday, before the feast
of St. Margaret (17th July), 1346, that Moricius
Williames first found John de Cornubia, glover,
dead in the High Street in St. Martin's. The
coroners came and viewed him there, and held
an inquest by the four nearest parishes, viz., St.
Martin's, All Saints', St. Michael's North, and
St. Peter's-in-the-Bailey, by the oath of John de
Rudesdone, and eleven others, who say that
Robert de Lincoln slew the said John on that
day at the hour of vespers in the street and
parish aforesaid ; he smote him with a knife
even to the heart. They say also that he had
naught in goods and was not in a ward, for he
was a stranger ; and he fled at once to the
church of St. Martin, and this befell in south-
east ward. And they priced the knife at a
penny. Pledges of the finder, Will, de Dene
and John Munt. Robert de Lincoln, felon, fled
to the church of St. Martin because of the
felony that he had committed in slaying John
de Cornubia. The coroners came on that
Monday and viewed the said Robert, and asked
of him for what cause he fled to that church

ASSIZE AND CORONERS' ROLLS 295

and kept therein ; and there before the coroners
he recognised that on the said Monday he slew
John de Cornubia feloniously with a knife.
The coroners asked him to render himself to
the peace of the king, but he said he would
not ; wherefore the bailiffs were bidden keep
good watch lest he escape. Also on Friday,
after the feast of St. James the apostle, the
coroners came and asked him to render him-
self to the peace of the king, but he said he
would not, and in their presence he abjured the
realm ; and he received the cross, and his port
was assigned him at Southampton.^

The Coroners' Rolls for the city of York
yield evidence as to the frequency with which
town as well as country churches were visited
by fugitives. Between 1349 and 1359 there
were eleven such cases, which occurred in the
parish churches of All Saints Pavement, St.
Cross (2), St. Laurence, St. Martin Coney
Street, St. Martin Micklegate (2), St. Saviour
Holy Trinity, St. William-on-the-Bridge, and
the conventual church of the Carmelite Friars.
In seven instances the crime was homicide, and
in the remainder one form or other of robbery.
The gravest case was the killing of Aldane,
vicar of the church of St. Laurence, Walm-
gate, by Stephen de Burton, chaplain ; the
criminal actually claimed sanctuary in the
church of which his victim was incumbent.

' This entry appeared in the Oxford Times of 22nd July 1910.

296 SANCTUARIES

It is somewhat of a bathos to find that one
of the next inquests on the roll concerns a
fugitive seeking sanctuary in the church of
St. Cross after stealing six pigs. In both these
cases the criminals abjured the realm, and were
assigned the port of Dover ; eleven and ten days
were respectively allotted as the time for making
the journey.

A Hertfordshire Assize Roll of the year
1247—8 records sanctuary gained by felons in
the priory church of Hertford, and in the parish
churches of St. Mary and St. Nicholas of the
county town, as well as in the churches of Wat-
ford, St. Peter at St. Albans, and " St. Michael
de Cruce Roys" (Royston), The churches of
Waltham and Walthamsted, Essex, are also
named ; in one of these cases there were two
sanctuary seekers, namely, Nigel de Mandrugg
and Emma his daughter. In the case of John
de Cherkmede, who took refuge in the church
of Aston, it is stated that he struck Richard de
Cherkmede on the head with a hatchet, and
that he died w^ithin eight days. His chattels
were worth 23s. 6d. Four men of Aston were
declared in mercy for not producing the hatchet.

The Somersetshire Assize Roll for 1243
contains entries of twenty-one sanctuary seekers
flying to churches, namely, to Axbridge, " Birch-
all," Crowcombe, St. Decuman, East Pennard,
Ford, Bristol (St. Thomas, St. John, and Hospital
of St. John), Northover, Otterford, Paulton,

o

o
u

o ^

ASSIZE AND CORONERS' ROLLS 297

Pilton, Upton, Walcot, " Wytchcote," and
Yatton. Twelve of these fugitives were robbers,
and nine murderers. In the case of Elyas Cute,
who placed himself in the church of Axbridge
for robbery, it was afterwards testified that he
had first fled to the church of Yeovil, and thence
to the liberty of Glastonbury. A robber who
took refuge in the church of Northover con-
fessed to the coroner that he had previously
abjured the kingdom at Crowcombe.

The apparently complete Assize Rolls of
Somersetshire for the year 1280 have twenty-
eight sanctuary entries, which relate to the
churches of Ashill (2), Bath (Sts. Peter and
Paul (2), and St. Michael-without-Southgate),
Bagborough, Bedminster, Cheddar, Clevedon,
Combe, Glastonbury, Harford, Ilton, Marston,
Marston Magna, Martock, Midsummer Nor-
ton, Milverton, North Petherton (2), Priddy,
Pylle, Quantoxhead (2), Taunton (in eccksia
orientale). West Chinnock, Williton, and Wins-
ford. The case of Adam le Messer and the
sanctuary of the church of St. Michael-without-
Southgate, Bath, was most remarkable. At the
gaol delivery, before Thomas Trivet and his
fellow justice, Adam, a thief, was being taken
to burial in the cemetery of St. Olave, when it
was found that he was coming to life. He was
carried into the church of St. Michael, recovered,
and after fifteen days acknowledged before
William Tesson, the coroner, that he was a

298 SANCTUARIES

horse-stealer, and abjured the realm. Details
are given of one of the two cases of man-
slaughter. The culprit, who took refuge in the
church at Ilton, was driving a cart with a yoke
of oxen through that place when a child in the
middle of the street was killed by one of the
wheels. The cart and two oxen, valued at 12s.,
were forfeited to the sheriff. Out of the total
number of fugitives on this roll, twenty-one
acknowledged to different forms of robbery, five
were murderers, and two were guilty of man-
slaughter.

On a very short Assize Roll of Devonshire,
of the year 1 237— 8, the escape of felons to eleven
churches for sanctuary, exclusive of Exeter, are
entered, including those of Fremington, South
Molton, Bampton, Uffculme, Ilfracombe, Tor-
rington, and Taverstock (2). At Exeter there
was a sudden incursion of a band of nine male-
factors, who dispersed themselves in diverse
churches of the city. All abjured the realm,
and none of them had any chattels. Four of
them were from Wiltshire, and three from
Gloucestershire. They probably made this
move to be near a seaport.

The Assize Rolls of Cornwall of 1 2 Edward I.,
1283-4, are exceptionally full. The Placita
Corona for this year exist in duplicate, and par-
tially in triplicate, whilst some pleas are actually
quadrupled. This multiplicity of rolls only
occurs very occasionally among the large number

ASSIZE AND CORONERS' ROLLS 299

stored at the Public Record Office. It appears
that on some circuits it was the custom for a roll
to be prepared for each itinerant justice of the
cases that came before him, as well as one of
a general nature for the Crown. There were
four justices holding assize at Launceston on this
occasion, namely, Salamon de RofFa, Robert de
Boylund, Robert Fulton, and William de Bray-
boef. They sat for three weeks from Easter
Day. One of these rolls is headed Rex, and the
other three Roff, Fultonis, and Boylund.

A careful comparison of these rolls shows
that the large total of seventy-eight cases of
sanctuary seeking and abjuring the realm were
brought to the notice of these justices and duly
enrolled. An analysis shows that twenty of
these fugitives had committed murder, whilst
fifty-eight confessed to various forms of robbery,
from horse-stealing to purloining a tunic worth
1 8d. In the account of the special sanctuary of
Padstow (chapter x.), it has been mentioned
that an alias or alternative name of this port was
Aldestowe, spelt in various fashion. It is curious
to note that the former name is used on the Rex
Roll, whilst the latter is invariably used on the
three other Assize Rolls of the same year.
Sixteen separate cases of fugitives on account
of robberies are entered as taking refuge in
the church of Padstow. Probably (as has
been already suggested in chapter x.) many of
these sanctuary seekers came from a distance,

300 SANCTUARIES

selecting Padstow on account of its being a
fairly busy seaport, and an outgoing ship could
be readily reached by a walk of a few yards
from the church of St. Petrock, the fugitive
would thus be spared the shame and fatigue
of a long pilgrimage to reach some distant
port. The same reason probably explains the
fact of a like number of cases occurring at
the church of Lostwithiel, for the river Fowey
was navigable from that town. Three fugi-
tives placed themselves in the church of St.
Michael, Helston, and two each in the churches
of St. Francis of Bodmin, St. Mary Mag-
dalene of Donnefde,^ St. Leonard of Duloe,
St. Cross, St. Michael's Mount, St. Cadoc of
Ponton, St. Mary of Truro, St. Michael of
Trewin, and St. Meferiane of Tintagel. The
following churches are entered as receiving a
single fugitive during the year : — St. Anthony
in Meneage, St. Anthony in Roseland, St. Peter
of Bodmin, St. Corentin of Cury, St. Mary of
Dunmere Wood, St. Germans, St. Gulval, St.
Hilary, St. Keyne, Lanteglos, St. Mary Magda-
lene of Launceston, Lanhilton, St. Mabyn, St.
Maker, St. Martin-by-Looe, St. Melan juxta
Penryn, St. Paul, St. Thomas the Martyr of

^ This name is spelt Donened in the second case ; in each place it
is entered under Burg' de Dotiehened. Possibly this is Doydon Head,
near Port Quin, in the parish of St. Edellion. Two or three of the
churches in this list seem to have disappeared since the thirteenth
century. Although I have visited every old church in Cornwall,
there are a few I cannot certainly identify ; perhaps, too, I may be
wrong in my reading of one or two of the names.

ASSIZE AND CORONERS' ROLLS 301

Penryn, St. Quintin, St. Andrew of Stratton, St.
Teath, St. Mary of Trywern and Tregony.

An instance of a clerk not being allowed to
abjure the realm occurs on these rolls. James, a
clerk, in a quarrel stabbed Ralph with a knife in
his belly so that he died ; the clerk fled for sanc-
tuary to the church of St. Michael's Mount, con-
fessed before the coroner, and abjured the realm.
But afterwards he was placed in the hands of
the prior of the Benedictine cell of St. Michael's
Mount.

The Assize Rolls of Cornwall for 1302-3
also supply brief entries as to a large number
of abjurations of the realm ; for this assize they
amounted to forty-three. Thirty-six of these
felons had committed some form of burglary,
robbery, or theft ; four were murderers, and
three were guilty of manslaughter. Five found
sanctuary in the church of St. Bartholomew of
Lostwithiel, four in St. Michael of Helston, and
two each in the churches of Looe, Padstow,
Stretton, and of the church of the Dominican
friars of Truro. Single cases of sanctuary seek-
ing occurred at the churches of St. Aldhelm of
Annalegh, St. Leonard of Bodmin, St. Buryan,

St. Catherine of , St. Filius of Eglos

(Philleigh), St. Hilary, St. Keyne, Kilhampton,
St. Welvela of Laneast, St. Mary of Lanivet, St.
Leonard of Launceston, Lezant, St. Mary Mag-
dalene of Launceston, St. Margaret of ,

Morval, Newlyn, St. Pinnock, St. Ewyn (Owen)

302 SANCTUARIES

of Redruth, Stratton, St. Teath, St. Mary of
Truro, St. Sancred of Truro, St. Tudy, St. Veep,
Week St. Mary, and St. Wynnow.

In the case of Alica, the wife of Thomas
Talgogon, a fugitive in the church of St. Teath,
the coroner assigned to the abjuror the Devon-
shire port of Ilfracombe {Elfredecombe), which is
described as being towards Wales {JValliani) ; this
seems to indicate that abjurors at that date might
take ship to Wales, if so permitted by the coroner.
The assigned port is very rarely entered on Assize
Rolls.

The following may be mentioned among
gleanings from the Coroners' Rolls of Notting- '
hamshire. During the year i 349 two men, who
were guilty of homicide, took sanctuary in the
church of St. Mary Magdalene, Newark : to
William Holyngton was assigned the port of
Dover, to be gained in eight days ; and to John
Sauvage the port of Rochester, and a like time
for the journey. There were six other cases of
fugitives to the same church after homicide in
1358, and to each was allotted the port of Dover
within eight days ; one of these delinquents was
John de Kilkenny, an Irish chaplain. In the
same year a fugitive, one Reginald, the son of
Hugh of West Leake, gained the little church of
Thorpe-in-the-Glebe ; his offence was the steal-
ing of a pair of linen breeches worth 8d., a
coverlet worth lad., and an old tunic valued at
i8d. ; death was the penalty under the law of

^^ tf- tc I T^illM. § ^*^

I

ii

w^j*/-

Ml

00 f^

M 1)

< 5

■J I"'

o ^

o -S

fe J=

ASSIZE AND CORONERS' ROLLS 303

the land, but he abjured the kingdom, and the
coroner sent him to Dover. About the same
time Henry de Oldham took refuge in the
church of St. Andrew, Langar, and confessed to
the stealing of six oxen ; he also was despatched
to Dover, and ordered to reach that port in eight
days. Another church utilised at this date by
a sanctuary seeker was that of St. Peter, Norwell.
In 1369 John Stryngar of Mansfield fled to that
church, having killed a man with a knife which
was worth 3d. ; he was ordered to reach Dover
within seven days. In the same year, at 9 o'clock
on the Saturday before St. Valentine's Day,
William de Wallan placed himself within the
church of Cromwell and tarried there until the
following Thursday, when he confessed before
the coroner to having stolen a horse worth loos.^
from the Abbot of Coverham, Richmondshire ;
he was ordered to reach Dover in six days.

A Coroners' Roll of Northamptonshire in-
cludes the following sanctuary seeking examples
between 29 Edward I. and 3 Edward 11. On
Thursday in Whitsun week, 1301, Richard
Mundeville and Nicholas his brother, of Wat-
ford, were playing at putting the stone, when
the stone of Richard struck his brother's head.
After Monday Nicholas became ill, and he died
on Friday before the Feast of St. Dunstan

' This was a great price ; the horse was probably a pacing palfrey.
The prices of horses that I have noted in these fourteenth century
rolls generally varied from half a mark for an old packhorse up to
20s., or even 40s.

304 SANCTUARIES

(19th May). Thereupon Richard in alarm fled
to the church of St. Peter at Watford. Dover
was assigned him as a port, but the jury declared
that the death was not due to the stone, but to
illness termed paralysis. The brothers were pro-
bably but youths, for Richard's chattels were
returned as a whip worth a halfpenny.

In 1302 one John de Lynne sought sanc-
tuary in the great church of Peterborough, and
confessed he was a robber ; and in the following
year another fugitive gained the church of St.
Leonard, Peterborough, after homicide. In both
these cases the fugitives were sent to the port of
Dover, but the time for the journey is not stated.
In 1303 the church of Maxey proved a refuge
for one acknowledging to homicide; in 1307 the
church ot St. Kyneburgh of Castor, for a robber,
and the church of All Saints, Peakirk, for a similar
delinquent ; and in 1309 the church of St. Mary,
Eye, for one who confessed to both robbery and
murder. All these criminals were deported to
Dover.

A Northamptonshire Coroners' Roll of
Edward III.'s reign records a case, in 1345, of
sanctuary seeking in the church of St. Peter,
Preston Capes, by one who had stolen twelve
sheep. In the same year is recorded the curious
instance of one Ralph Caponn, who fled to the
church of St. Mary Magdalene, Ecton, on Friday
in the octave of St. Hilary (i 3th January), having
robbed a person of 10s. in the wood of Harpole,

ASSIZE AND CORONERS' ROLLS 305

To this he confessed to the coroner on the follow-
ing Sunday, but at that time expressed himself
as unwilling to abjure the realm. He stayed in
Ecton church until the Feast of St. Valentine
(14th February), when he escaped from that
church and again took sanctuary in the church
of St. Peter of Cogenhoe ; and there, on the
Feast of St. Peter in Cathedra (22nd February),
he again confessed, abjured the realm, and was
dispatched to Dover.

The last of these somewhat desultory extracts
from the Coroners' Rolls tells yet again of the
decollation of a wandering abjuror. On the
feast of St. Thomas the Martyr, 1349, John
Couper took sanctuary in the church of St. Mary,
Stow, county Lincoln. He confessed to having
killed John Pykel on Whitsun Eve, abjured the
realm, and was assigned the port of Dover.
He seems to have duly set out, but ere long
wandered from the king's highway (ex regia
strata), and was guilty of various acts of
robbery. Whereupon he was pursued by one
John de Rolleston, who overtook him, beheaded
him, and dispatched the head to the castle of
Lincoln.

It may be useful to add a word or two on the
two classes of rolls from which the information
in this chapter has been culled.

The Assize Rolls in the Record Office extend
from John to Edward IV. They number 1550
rolls, and are arranged under counties, but they

3o6 SANCTUARIES

are by no means continuous for any one shire.
These rolls include various headings, such as
Placita Forinseca, Deliberationes Gaolarum, Placita
de quo Warranto, &c. ; the records of abjurations
are to be looked for under Placita Coronce. It is
quite clear, however, that in some cases the
ustices did not require the enrolment of abjura-
tions. As a rule, both in the Assize and Coroners'
Rolls, the letters abjur occur on the left-hand
side of the membranes pointing out cases of this
description.

The Coroners' Rolls extend from Henry III.
to Henry VI. ; they only number 256 rolls, and
various counties are unrepresented ; they are
most numerous for the reign of Edward III.
These rolls are not records of inquests entered at
the time they occurred, but appear to have been
prepared after a mixed fashion — the dates being
often strangely arranged — when demanded by
the itinerant justices. They are most perversely
irregular in form ; indeed it is difficult to find
any two or three arranged after the same plan.
Usually the entries follow a legal method, be-
ginning Inquisitio capta, but occasionally they
take a narrative or brief descriptive form, begin-
ning Accidit apud, Accidit in villa, or Contigit apud.
The searcher in these rolls for abjurations must
be prepared for many disappointments, for he will
often draw blank. The rolls not infrequently
consist, mainly or in part, of exigent entries ; that
is of writs exacting the appearance of certain

ASSIZE AND CORONERS' ROLLS 307

persons within certain days under pain of out-
lawry.

Both Assize and Coroners' Rolls have printed
indexes, which were issued in 1894; they will
be found at the end of " Lists and Indexes,
No. IV."

CHAPTER XV

WALES, SCOTLAND, AND IRELAND

The inclusion of Wales, Scotland, and Ireland in
this book on the Sanctuaries and Sanctuary Seekers
of Medicsval England was not originally intended ;
but, as an afterthought, the following short notes
on sanctuaries in these three kingdoms are inserted.
It should, however, be clearly understood that
this chapter makes no claim to any particular
research, and is only to be taken as a brief supple-
ment to the longer and more detailed account of
England.

Wales

The laws of Howel Dda, compiled about the
beginning of the tenth century, contain various
references to sanctuary. If any one obtains sanc-
tuary consequent on treason against the lord, the
law adjudges the forfeiture of his patrimony,
though he shall escape with his life. A thief
proceeding to another country after sanctuary is
free from prosecution in the kingdom he has
gained. If a man do wrong to the worth of a
penny while in sanctuary, and a relic upon him,
he is to lose the whole of his property unless he

obtain a new sanctuary ; the sanctuary whose

308

WALES, SCOTLAND, IRELAND 309

privilege he broke is not to renew it. It is also
interesting to note that this code includes fleeing
to or entering a sanctuary as a legal act of dis-
obedience/ This implies that the Church in its
mercy provides a sanctuary to escape the civil
law, and all the concern that the temporal power
takes in the matter is to do its best to see that
the privilege is not abused.

The important Slebech Commandery of
the Knights Hospitallers of St. John, in Pem-
brokeshire, about half-way between Haverford-
west and Narbeth, claimed, in common with
other houses of this military order, through
various papal bulls and royal charters, the right
of sanctuary for their buildings as well as for
their church or chapel. In certain cases,
adjacent plots of land were also held to be
immune from all legal invasion. At Amroth,
given to Slebech about 1 1 50, there were fifty
acres of sanctuary land, whilst at Loughor and
Penrice, whose churches and manors were also
given to Slebech Commandery in the same
century, there were buildings termed the Sanc-
tuary, within whose walls the fugitives were
doubtless housed. Mr. J. Roger Rees, who
wrote a series of papers on this settlement of
the Hospitallers in the zArchceologia Cambrensis
for 1897, says that —

" Sanctuary was not only provided for human

1 Ancient Laws and Institutes of Wales i^^c. Com., i84i),pp. 41 1,
445, 447-8, 703-

310 SANCTUARIES

beings ; it was for beasts as well. And not only
were cattle included whilst within the sacred
enclosure ; these same herds were protected
when feeding elsewhere during the day, provided
they returned at night to the place of refuge.
In those days any one contemplating a raid on
his neighbour's property could place his family
and belongings in the safety of sanctuary, and
then start out with a light heart, to find his own
way back to the same shelter when his business
had been satisfactorily accomplished."

No references are given to support this ex-
traordinary abuse of sanctuary, and it is pro-
bable that the writer only conceives that this
condition of things was likely to have been
the case on the lands of Slebech Commandery.
Certainly this lawlessness of sanctuary seems to
have prevailed on other Welsh lands of the
Hospitallers. Sir John Wynn, in his History
of the Gwydier Family, says : " From the towne
of Conway to Bala, and from Nantconway to
Denbigh, there was continually fostered a wasp's
nest, which troubled the whole country. I
mean a lordship belonging to St. John of
Jerusalem, called ' Spytty Jevan,' a large thing,
which had privilege of sanctuary. This peculiar
jurisdiction, not governed by the king's lawes,
became a receptacle of thieves and murtherers,
who safely being warranted there by law, made
the place thoroughly peopled. Noe spot within
twenty miles was safe from their incursions and

WALES, SCOTLAND, IRELAND 31 f

robberies, and what they got within their Hmits
was their own. ... At times there were wont
to be above a hundred, well-horsed and well
appointed."

As a set-ofF to these two statements, in both
of which there appears to be an element of
exaggeration, that careful antiquary Leland,
when writing in the days of Henry VIII. of
the Cistercian Abbey of Margan, co. Glamorgan,
states that it had the (chartered) privilege of
sanctuary, but that the Welsh most rarely or
never used it. He also states that the other
Cistercian abbey of the same county, that of
Neath, had the like privilege, but that its use
was most infrequent.^

The small secluded church of Pennant Mel-
angell, in the northern part of Montgomery-
shire, is supposed to have had peculiar sanctuary
privileges, but there do not appear to be any
grounds for considering that there was here any
kind of sanctuary beyond that which accrued
to every consecrated church and churchyard."

The following interesting record of the close
of Queen Mary's reign occurs among the Acts
of the Privy Council.*

"St James, 20t/i July 1558.— A lettre to
WilHam Symondes, Esquier, Vice-President of
Wales, with a supplycacion enclosed, exhibited

' Leland's Collectanea, vol. i., pp. 104-5.

2 See Chester Archaol. Soc. Proceedings, iii., 304-5, where a
picturesque legend as to the founding of this church is set forth.
' Acts of the Privy Counal, new series, vi., 351.

3i2 SANCTUARIES

here by foure prisoners remayning in Radnour
Castell, whereby they complayne that having
escaped prison and taken a parishe churche as
sanctuary, they were violentlye drawen out of
the same and committed to warde, where they
styll are ; he is wylled if their offences be suche
that they may have sanctuary by the lawe, than
to cause them to be restored thereunto, otherwise
to cause them, if they can have no sanctuary, to
be preceded withall according to justice and the
qualitie of their offence."

Scotland

An Act of King WilHam, of the year 1165,
confirmatory of an earlier assize of King David,
provides very severe penalties for any kind of
violence done to those in sanctuary in a section
entitled " Of injurie done to one within girth";
another section attached like penalties to those
who did violence within the king's court. In
the reign of Alexander II. (12 14-1249) it was
ordained " Of him quha flies to halie kirk," that
if he confessed himself innocent and for poverty
was not able to find security, he was to appear
in any convenient place appointed by the king
or bishop ; and if found innocent he was to
depart in peace, but if guilty to be punished
according to his demerits. The same applied to
manslayers, traitors to their masters, and those
challenged of murder or treason ; it is obvious,

WALES, SCOTLAND, IRELAND 313

however, that some other course was adopted
with fugitives who confessed themselves. This
is made clear by legislation under Robert IL in
13735 whereby it was ordained that a manslayer
flying to the kirk was to be admonished to come
forth and present himself to the law, but if he
refused to come forth he was to be banished and
exiled for ever.

Deliberate murder or forethought felony was
excluded from the immunities of the kirk under
James IIL in 1469, when it was enacted that a
kirk fugitive suspected of murder was to be
yielded up to the sheriff within fifteen days, and
if on assize he was found guilty of forethought
felony, he was to be punished by the king's laws,
but " if it be founden suddunlie, to be restored
againe to the freedome and immunity of haly
kirk and girth."

By an Act of James V., passed 5th January
1535, it was provided that all masters of girths
within the realm were to make responsible men
bailiffs or deputies of the girths, and their names
were to be sent to the Lord Justice Clerk ; and
these bailiffs were to be strictly charged to deliver
up to the sheriffs for trial all those fugitives sus-
pected of forethought felony.

The abbey of Holyrood, founded by David L
in 1 128 as a monastery for Austin canons, was
the most celebrated sanctuary in Scotland. The
clause supposed to convey special sanctuary privi-
lege occurs in the foundation charter of David L

314 SANCTUARIES

— prohibo ne aliquis capeat pandum super terram
Sancti Crucis, nisi abbas ejusdem loci, rectum et jus
facere recusaverit. After the Reformation, when
sanctuary for sheltering criminals came to an
end, immunity from arrest, for debtors within
the precincts of the King's Palace of Holyrood-
house was zealously maintained, notwithstand-
ing the fact that the ancient abbey adjoining
the palace, to which the privilege had been
granted, was suppressed and in ruins. But with
civil sanctuary for debtors we have here no con-
cern, so it must suffice to say that this immunity
for debtors lingered on at Holyrood until 1880.^

According to the Laws of the Marches
between Scotland and England, in 1249, by
twelve knights of each kingdom, it was enacted
that a criminal crossing the Border may take
the peace of the kingdom at the next kirk, the
bell being rung, until he obtain it from the
sheriff.

A statute of Alexander II., in 1230, provided
that if robbers or thieves who fled to the kirk
confessed their fault, for God's sake, they were
to lose neither life nor limb, but they were to
restore what they had taken, make amends to
the king, and swear never to commit the like
again ; but if they maintained their innocence,
they were to purge themselves according to law.
This law was also to apply to homicides, but not

^ Full details as to this harbour of debtors will be found in Peter
Halkerston's Palace and Sanctuary of Holyroodhouse (1831).

WALES, SCOTLAND, IRELAND 315

to heretics. It was further laid down about this
period that kirk sanctuary was not to be afforded
to those who dwelt by night in the fields, to
notorious highway robbers, to churchbreakers,
or to those under sentence of excommunication.
Scotland had a far larger number of sanctu-
aries of civil origin than was the case with
England, where they seem to have been confined
to the county of Chester. Various incidental
references to these occur in the Acts of the Par-
liament of Scotland. The " sanctuary crofts " of
Linlithgow are named as forming part of the
dower of Mary, queen of James II., in 1451.
The castle of Stirling and the country for four
miles round is described in the Act of 1584 as
pads propugnaculum ara et asylum. The citadel
of Leith is mentioned as a sanctuary in 1661.
Incidental reference is made in 1681 to the
" Bailliarie of the Burgh of Taine within the
four girth Croces."^

Ireland

The chartulary of the Cistercian abbey of
St. Mary, Dublin, preserved at the Bodleian, opens
with the record of an unusual and interesting
case of sanctuary. Amabilla Comyn in 1277
brought a charge before the chief justiciary at
Dublin against WilHam and Patrick, lay brothers
of the house, and six others, who had taken

1 Acts of the Parliament of Scotland (Record Com.), ten folio
vols., printed 1814-1823.

3i6 SANCTUARIES

sanctuary in the abbey church, after having slain,
as she alleged, her husband, John Comyn, near
the grange of Portmarnock. Comyn, as appears
from other entries in the chartulary, had previ-
ously had various disputes with the abbey as to
their adjacent properties at Portmarnock. The
jury found that Brother William was guilty of
the actual death, and that Brother Patrick was
guilty of consent and aid. The abbot paid a
fine of _^io, but demanded to retain the custody
of the two lay brothers according to the statute
of the Cistercian Order, and the claim was
granted. The other six offenders were in due
course outlawed, after the ordinary method of
dealing with sanctuary seekers. By a statute of
the General Chapter of Citeaux, held in 1229,
each abbey was directed to provide a strong and
secure prison for the detention of thieves, incen-
diaries, forgers, murderers, and other criminals.
It was the fate of Brother William to end his
days in the abbey prison. This fact transpired
before the justices of assize many years later,
namely in 1291. The abbot was charged with
knowingly receiving WilHam after the commis-
sion of a felony. The abbot was able, however,
to refer to the roll, and to show that Wilham
had been by the court committed to his pre-
decessor's custody, and that he remained in prison
until the time of his death.

Among other references to sanctuary in the
religious houses of Ireland, it may be mentioned

WALES, SCOTLAND, IRELAND 317

that the foundation charter of the abbey of
Dunbrody (i 175) expressly enjoins the monks to
harbour in security any fugitive malefactors who
might seek their protection.

The abbey of St. Thomas the Martyr,
founded at Dublin for Austin canons in 1177,
appears to have had certain defined sanctuary
bounds ; a charter of the time of King John
grants certain lands to the canons juxta terram
sanctuarii.

The Red Book of the Exchequer in Ire-
land, printed by the Record Commission of
1907, contains interesting references to sanctuary
seekers under the year 1291. It was stated
in the ArticuH Cleri that if any one fly for
refuge to a church for any crime, it is not
permitted by the lay officers that necessaries
and victuals should be ministered by any one
to the fugitive under a fixed penalty, firmly to
be enjoined ; but they cause the fugitive to be
detained in fetters in the church itself, as lately
at Loughrea, in the diocese of Clonfert. To
this the king made two replies. One to the
effect that many things have to be permitted for
the immunity of the Church, the King, and the
kingdom at a time and at the seat of war, which
at another time ought not to be permitted ; let
inquiry be made about the past, and justice
therein done. The second general reply was
that the king wills that a fugitive of this
kind should be well guarded at the church, in

3i8 SANCTUARIES

such a way that there should be access up to the
due term, and that he should have victuals ; and
if he refused to leave the church after the lapse
of the term according to law, the victuals should
be withdrawn from him.

CHAPTER XVI

THE DECAY AND EXTINCTION OF SANCTUARIES

Henry VII. and papal restriction of sanctuary — Statutes 4 Henry
VIII. — Abjurors to be branded on the thumb, 1529 — Abjuration
to other countries prohibited in 1 530-1 — Traitors excluded from
sanctuary, 1534 — Cromwell's Remembrancer — "The Saying of
Thomas Wolff" — Protest of the Pilgrimage of Grace — Sanctuary
case at Knowle — The establishment of eight sanctuary towns —
The substitution of Chester for Manchester, and of Stafford for
Chester — Legislation under Edward VI., Mary and Elizabeth —
Extinction of all sanctuaries under James I. — Alleged claim of
sanctuary in 1636 — Reflections of Mazzinghi, Stanley, and
Hallam— The poet Drayton.

One of the chief causes that led to the decay-
in England in the fifteenth century of the
once generally held reverence for sanctuaries,
was the small respect shown by our kings
for these immunities of the Church when they
gave shelter to their political enemies. It is true
that Henry VII., when the civil wars had ceased,
on two occasions suffered Perkin Warbeck, the
impostor, to escape with his life through the
taking of sanctuary ; but by papals bulls, obtained
respectively from Innocent VIII. in 1482, from
Alexander VI. in 1493, and from Julius in 1503,
he contrived materially to increase the number
of offences exempt from sanctuary, and more
especially to strike out not only every form of

\

320 SANCTUARIES

high treason, but even the suspicion ot treason.'
Moreover, Henry VII. under these bulls was able
to appoint keepers to look after certain classes of
fugitives, so that, as Professor Trenholme says,
" he w^as able to get his victims out of sanctuary
and into his own hands." ^

Soon after the accession of the masterful
Henry VIII., it became manifest that England's
special sanctuaries and general sanctuary im-
munity were doomed.

A statute of 4 Henry VIII. (15 12) thus dealt
with " How Plea of Sanctuary in a foreign shire
shall be tried."

"... If any murderer or felon upon his
arreynment hereafter do allege that he hadde
taken any Church or Churchyard for murder,
felonie or other place privileged for the same in
a foreyn Countye and ageynst his Will taken owt
thereof, that then the Kynges Attorny or any
other person that wyll shewe or allege for the
Kyng that the seyd Murderer or felon so arreyned
was taken at large in the same Shier wher he is
so arreyned, that then the same Allegeaunce and
Issue to be tryed by the Inquest that shuld trie
the seyd Murder or Felonye within the same
Shire and before the same Justices where the
seyd Murderer or Felon is arreyned as though
the seyd foreyn pley had not be pleyded by the

^ Rymer's Fadera, xii. 541-2, xiii. 104.

'^ A remarkable instance of this has been given under St. Martin
le Grand, of the year 1495.

THE DECAY OF SANCTUARIES 321

sayd felon : And if it be founden by the same
Inquest that the seyd murderer or felon was taken
wythin the same Shire as is aforesaid that then he
to have non avauntage or benefette of the matter
alleged by hym for takyng owte of the Churche
or Churchyerde or other place p'veleged in any
such foreyn Shire."

By a further statute of 1529, it was provided
that all felons and murderers taking sanctuary and
making abjuration were to be marked by the
coroner with a hot iron with the letter A on the
thumb, or in default should lose all benefit of
such sanctuary.

Chapter xiv. of the statute of 22 Henry VIII.
(1530— i) effected a great change. The pre-
amble gave curious reasons for the abolition of
abjuration of the realm. It is therein stated that
many of these abjurors were expert mariners,
others able men for the wars and defence of the
realm, and others trained archers who have in-
structed foreigners in the exercise and practice of
archery, whilst yet a fourth class of these exiles
" disclosed their knowledge of the commodities
and secrets of this realm, to no little damage and
prejudice of the same." Henceforth the coroner
was to direct any one desirous of abjuring to a
sanctuary place within the realm, and he was to
remain there, under pain of death, for the rest of
his natural life. Sanctuary men committing new
offences were to lose all sanctuary benefit, and to
be committed to gaol.

322 SANCTUARIES

By the xiii. chapter of statute 26 Henry VIII.
(1534), it was provided that : —

" Traitors shall not have any Benefit of
Sanctuary.

" And to thyntent that all treasons shulde
be the more drede hated and detestyd to be done
by any psonne or psonnes, and also because yt is
a greate boldnes and an occasyon to ylle disposed
psonnes to adventure to imbrace theyr malycious
intentes and enterpryses, w^hiche all true subjectes
ought to study to eschew^e : Be it therfore
enactyd by thauctoryte afore said that none
offendour, yn anye kyndes of Highe Treasons
what so ever they be, theyr aydours consentours
counsailours nor abettours, shalbe admytted to
have the benefite or privylege of any maner of
seyntuarie ; consideringe that matters of treasons
toucheth so nighe bothe the suertye of the
Kynge our Soverayne Lordes personne and his
heyres and successours."

Cromwell's " Remembrances," that is his notes
to refresh his mind when next seeing the king,
for 1534, include two headings as to persons in
sanctuary ; whilst in 1536 there is a "Remem-
brance " to speak specially of the utter destruc-
tion of sanctuaries.^

There is an interesting paper of 30th April,
1536, relative to sanctuary for murder in the
Public Record Office.

Letters a7id Papers Henry K/7/. (Dom. State Papers), vols. vii.
and X.

THE DECAY OF SANCTUARIES 323

" The saying of Thomas Wolff, 30th April,
28 Henry VIII. , concerning the murder of John
Strakeford by Steven Claybroke, in a quarrel
about a sword. Claybroke took refuge in the
house of Ric. Cokkes, the headborowe, and was
taken thence by certain of his neighbours, and
delivered to Wm. Cood, the constable, who took
him to Sir Roger Chamley, who sent him to
Newgate. On his way he desired his captors to
be good to him, ' for why, my book will do me
no service for wilful murder, for I have read the
king's act in my house.' Some of them asked
him why he took not Chesewyke church, seeing
he was so light of foot, and so far before them.
He answered, ' What should I have to do then,
for the church will not serve me for wilful
murder ? ' And yet, when we came to Charing
Cross, he looked to Westminster, and said, ' I
would I were in yonder church ; ' and then
said the constable again, ' I would thou haddest
gone straight thither before so that I had not
been cumbered.' " ^

It was towards the close of 1536 that the
considerable rising in the north of England
against the ecclesiastical policy of Henry VIII, ,
known as the Pilgrimage of Grace, took place.
An assembly of clergy at Pontefract drew up a
brief set of articles rejecting the recent innova-
tions. Their protest included an objection to

^ Letters and Papers Henry VIII. (Dom. State Papers), vol. x.
763-

324 SANCTUARIES

the changes made as to sanctuaries, which they
regarded as contrary to the laws of the church.^
This, too, was one of the points insisted upon by
the leaders of the insurgents at the second meet-
ing at Doncaster — " Sanctuary, to save a man
for all causes in extreme need, in the church for
40 days, and further according to the laws as
they were used in the beginning, of this king's
days." *

A further sanctuary reforming Act had been,
passed this year whereby sanctuary men were
ordered to wear badges, not to wear any weapons,
and never to be out at night.

There is a long file of interrogations and
depositions taken in 1538 by Sir Anthony Fitz-
herbert and a commission which illustrates
certain points of sanctuary law as then main-
tained. The particular sanctuary concerned was
that of Knowle, Warwickshire, where a collegiate
church of much importance and renown was
founded about the year 1400. The manor was
held by Westminster Abbey. ^

Their commission directed them to take final
order for restitution to the king's chaplain.
Dr. Croke, of the sums of which he was robbed
by Hugh Hervye, who took sanctuary at Knowle,
where he still remains, although he was indicted
for robbing his master, a case in" which the law

' Con. MSS., Cleop., E. v. 381.
' Letters and Papers Henry VIII., xi. 507.

' Victoria County Hist, of Hants, ii. i7f-2. This is the only
rfeerence of which we are aware to a special sanctuary at Knowle.

THE DECAY OF SANCTUARIES 325

allowed no such privilege. The king's pre-
vious letters to the officers of the Sanctuary
having been disregarded, the Commissioners
were to order obstinate persons to appear before
the Council. The interrogatories of Richard
Yeoman, owner of the Goat Inn, Strand,
actually numbered fifty-two. Depositions in
reply were made by Henry Horley and others.
The main point at issue seems to have been
whether Harvey had been attached for felony
before claiming privilege of sanctuary. By the
joint deposition of Robert Croke and William
Cull, it appears that he was attached, in Henry
Whorley's at Knowle, by Robert Bury, for rob-
bing his master Richard Yeoman, as well as Dr.
Croke's servant Simon Gelinge, in Yeoman's
house, the Goat Inn in the Strand, on which he
desired of William Pynnock, of Knowle, privi-
lege of sanctuary for the stolen goods ; and that
Pynnocke called William Barnehurst, of Knowle,
and told him that, as the bailey's deputy, he ought
to take the felon's confession privily and give
him privilege of sanctuary.^

In 1540 Cromwell's "Remembrances" of
matters to lay before his royal master again point
to him as the chief adviser in Henry's destructive
policy. The following entry,^ said to be in his
own handwriting, shows that Cromwell was

1 Victoria County Hist, of Hants, xlii. pt. i. 6i8.

2 Cott. MSS., Titus, B. i. 476. " Item for a Determynatyon of
the Sanctuaries."

326 SANCTUARIES

determined that the rehgious element should be
entirely blotted out from the idea and practice of
special sanctuary.

fop -^aS- <2^ciA'VAXUmj2/''t,^5

It was in this year that the Act was passed,
which, whilst it did not interfere with the very
small degree of immunity still left to all churches
and churchyards, declares that no sanctuary should
give any kind of protection to persons guilty of
murder, rape, burglary, robbery, arson, sacrilege,
and their accessories. All special or chartered
sanctuaries were abolished, and in their stead the
following eight towns, with certain defined limits,
were declared to be sanctuaries : Wells, West-
minster, Northampton, Norwich, York, Derby,
Manchester, and Launceston. Coroners were to
direct abjuring fugitives to one or other of these
privileged places. No such place was to receive
more than twenty sanctuary men. Directions
were given as to the conveyance of abjurors to
another place, if the first one was full. Sanctuary
men were to be mustered daily, and on not appear-
ing for three days to lose their privilege.

The selected towns, as might naturally be
expected, by no means appreciated the responsi-
bility and odium thus thrust upon them, and

THE DECAY OF SANCTUARIES 327

many remonstrances reached the Council. At a
meeting of the Privy Council held at Hampton
Court on 20th February, i 541, orders were issued
to the commissioners for sanctuaries requiring
them to allot such places within the selected
towns " as might be convenient for xx'y sanc-
tuary men, the lest noysum and incommodious
for the sayd townes, and also where the sanc-
tuary men shall of necessity, whensoever they cum
abrode, be moost in the sight and eye of honest

5> 1

men.

A year later an Act of Parliament (33 Henry
VIII. c. 15) transferred the sanctuary of Man-
chester to Chester. The preamble to the Act is
curious reading, and shows what an utter failure
was made by following up Cromwell's ill-digested
scheme for establishing sanctuaries altogether
apart from religious direction and restraint. It
states of Manchester that " its inhabitants manu-
facture clothes as well of linen as of wollen, and
employed many hands, and Manchester was there-
fore greatly resorted to by strangers, as well of
Irlond as of other places within this realm, with
the necessary wares for making clothes to be sold
there ; the lynen yarne had to lie out in the
night for half a year to be whited, and the wollen
clothes there made must hang upon the taynter
before they could be made up ; that many
strangers bring their cottons also to be sold ;
whereas the sanctuary men live in idleness to ill

* Nicolas' Privy Council Proceedings, vii. 133 5.

326 SANCTUARIES

determined that the rehgious element should be
entirely blotted out from the idea and practice of
special sanctuary.

It was in this year that the Act was passed,
which, whilst it did not interfere with the very
small degree of immunity still left to all churches
and churchyards, declares that no sanctuary should
give any kind of protection to persons guilty of
murder, rape, burglary, robbery, arson, sacrilege,
and their accessories. All special or chartered
sanctuaries were abolished, and in their stead the
following eight towns, with certain defined limits,
were declared to be sanctuaries : Wells, West-
minster, Northampton, Norwich, York, Derby,
Manchester, and Launceston. Coroners were to
direct abjuring fugitives to one or other of these
privileged places. No such place was to receive
more than twenty sanctuary men. Directions
were given as to the conveyance of abjurors to
another place, if the first one was full. Sanctuary
men were to be mustered daily, and on not appear-
ing for three days to lose their privilege.

The selected towns, as might naturally be
expected, by no means appreciated the responsi-
bility and odium thus thrust upon them, and

THE DECAY OF SANCTUARIES 327

many remonstrances reached the Council. At a
meeting of the Privy Council held at Hampton
Court on 20th February, 1541, orders were issued
to the commissioners for sanctuaries requiring
them to allot such places within the selected
towns " as might be convenient for xx'y sanc-
tuary men, the lest noysum and incommodious
for the sayd townes, and also where the sanc-
tuary men shall of necessity, whensoever they cum

abrode, be moost in the sight and eye of honest

)> 1
men.

A year later an Act of Parliament (33 Henry
VIII. c. 15) transferred the sanctuary of Man-
chester to Chester. The preamble to the Act is
curious reading, and shows what an utter failure
was made by following up Cromwell's ill-digested
scheme for establishing sanctuaries altogether
apart from religious direction and restraint. It
states of Manchester that " its inhabitants manu-
facture clothes as well of linen as of wollen, and
employed many hands, and Manchester was there-
fore greatly resorted to by strangers, as well of
Irlond as of other places within this realm, with
the necessary wares for making clothes to be sold
there ; the lynen yarne had to lie out in the
night for half a year to be whited, and the wollen
clothes there made must hang upon the taynter
before they could be made up ; that many
strangers bring their cottons also to be sold ;
whereas the sanctuary men live in idleness to ill

' Nicolas' Privy Council Proceedings, vii. 133 5.

328 SANCTUARIES

example, and entice others to do the like, and to
mispend their master's goods ; that thefts and
felonies have thereby increased ; that the said
Irishmen and others now withdraw themselves,
to the utter decay of the town ; that Manchester
is not walled, so that sanctuary men continually
escape out at night, and that there is no proper
officer nor jail to regulate matters."

Chester, however, successfully and promptly
resented the indignity proposed to be done to
her. The Act provided that if the king found
Chester unsuitable, he might substitute some
other place without further legislation. The
strenuous opposition of the Chester authorities
prevailed, and a proclamation was issued on
30th May, 1542, wherein it was stated that : —

" As Chester adjoins Wales and is near the
sea, so that malefactors can escape from it to
Scotland, Ireland, and outward parts, the King
substitutes Stafford for it, and orders the con-
stables of Manchester to bring the sanctuary
men now there to Stafford and deliver them by
indenture to the bailiffs."

The only change in sanctuary legislation
made under Edward VI. was the exclusion of a
horse-stealer from such benefits.^

The partial re-establishment of chartered
sanctuary by Queen Mary, and its repeal by
Queen Elizabeth, has been already dealt with in
the account of the sanctuary of Westminster.

' I Edw. VI,, c. 12 ; and 2 & 3 Edw, VI. c. 33.

THE DECAY OF SANCTUARIES 329

So soon as James came to the throne, the
town sanctuaries which had proved to be a curse
in all the eight selected places, both to the sanc-
tuary men and to the general inhabitants, came
to an end.

" And be it also enacted by the Authoritie
of this present Parliament, That so much of all
Statutes as concerneth abjured Persons and Sanc-
tuaries, or ordering or governing of Persons
abjured or in sanctuaries, made before the five
and thirtieth yeere of the late Queene Elizabeth's
Reigne, shall also stand repealed and be voide." ^

Twenty years later all forms of sanctuary in
church or churchyard were swept away.

" And be it alsoe enacted by the authoritie
of this present Parliament, that no Sanctuarie or
Priviledge of Sanctuary shalbe hereafter admitted
or allowed in any case." ^

It has been sometimes said that the latest case
of church sanctuary occurred in Wiltshire in the
year 1636, notwithstanding the general repealing
statute of the end of James' reign. But this is
a mistake, for the resort to a church in the
following curious incident arose from the fact
that a writ cannot be served within such a
building.

According to the sessional records of Wilt-
shire, certain inhabitants of Hindon appealed
to the justices for help in the following case.
Samuel Yarworth, clerk, was ordered at sessions

1 I James I., c. 25. ^ 21 James I., c. 28.

330 SANCTUARIES

of January, 1635—6, to be bound over to good
behaviour and to make due provision for the
wife of one Anthony Saunders and her child, he
having advised and assisted the husband to leave
her, probably from some charitable or religious
motive. The officers endeavoured to execute the
writ, but Yarworth fled to sanctuary and took
refuge in the chapel of Hindon. The officers,
however, lay in wait and caught him as he was
running from the chapel to his dwelling-house,
but he by force " rescussed " himself, and again
entered the chapel, whence he retired to London
and obtained letters missive against the officers
summoning them to appear before the High
Commission Court. Certain further proceedings
of a curious character are entered on the session
rolls of the following July, when Yarworth ap-
peared and desired that the differences between
him and the inhabitants of Hindon might be left
to the hearing and determination of Lord Cot-
tington, to which consent was given providing a
justice or justices were present. On Yarworth
being questioned as to his disobeying the former
warrants, he replied repeatedly — " I did nothing
therein but what my lord Archbishop of Canter-
bury put me upon." The court, conceiving
these words not fit to be spoken of so great a
person in so public a place, bound Yarworth over
in good behaviour until the next sessions.^

With Mr. Mazzinghi's reflections on the

1 lVt7ts Natural History and Archaological Magazine, 1901.

THE DECAY OF SANCTUARIES 331

final annihilation of England's mediasval sanc-
tuaries we find ourselves in full accord : —

" Before we destroy we should at least con-
sider and weigh what we propose to do, lest in
pruning the luxuriant or decayed or diseased
branches, we lop off those that bear precious
fruit. The legislators of the sixteenth and
seventeenth centuries, in interfering with char-
tered sanctuaries, did not approach their work
with due calmness or exact discrimination ; after
a period of vacillation, of partial reform, and of
re-enactments, they cut away the entire tree.
With what result ? There was no longer any
distinction between the dishonest and the unfor-
tunate debtor. The quality of a political offence
or of a criminal act was left to the harsh letter
of an indiscriminating, often a cruel and bar-
barous law, and the innocent and the guilty were
alike confounded in the penal consequences of
the imputed crime. Even, where the offence
was clear, there was no longer the merciful
privilege of the sanctuary, which could inter-
pose to mitigate the excessive or disproportioned
penalties attached by the law to a conviction."

In preference to setting before our readers
any reflections and general thoughts of our own,
it seems better to give those of two other writers
of no small weight.

Dean Stanley, in h.h Memorials of Westminster
Abbey, has these words : —

"The (chartered) sanctuaries 01 mediasval

332 SANCTUARIES

Christendom may have been necessary remedies
for a barbarous state of society, but when the
barbarism, of which they formed part, disap-
peared, they became almost unmixed evils ; and
the National School and the Westminster Hospi-
tal, which have succeeded to the site of the West-
minster sanctuary, may not unfairly be regarded
as humble indications of the dawn of a better
age." It must, however, be remembered, as
already stated, that there were no mediceval sanc-
tuary buildings to the north of the great abbey
church.

The historian Hallam's happily chosen words,
in his Middle Ages, are well worthy of repro-
duction : —

" Under a due administration of justice, this
privilege would have been simply and constantly
mischievous, as we properly consider it to be in
those countries where it still subsists. But in the
rapine and tumult of the Middle Ages, the right
of sanctuary might as often be a shield to
innocence as an impunity to crime. We can
hardly regret, in reflecting on the desolating
violence which prevailed, that there should have
been some green spots in the wilderness, where
the feeble and the persecuted could find refuge.
How must this right have enhanced the venera-
tion for religious institutions ! How gladly must
the victims of internal warfare have turned their
eyes from the baronial castle, the dread and
scourge of the neighbourhood, to those venerable

THE DECAY OF SANCTUARIES 333

walls, within which not even the clamour of
arms could be heard, to disturb the chant of
holy men and the sacred service of the altar."

The sixteenth-century poet, Michael Drayton,
in his Wars of the Barons, has left us a stanza,
which some have taken as a realistic picture of
the inner life of a medieval chartered sanctuary.
Doubtless it contains some element of melan-
choly truth, but it must be recollected that
Drayton's own experience was of the miserable
and criminal condition of sanctuary life in Eliza-
bethan days, when such places had been reso-
lutely purged of any exercise of religion and of
any decent supervision ; his experience doubtless
tinged his opinion.

" Some few themselves in sanctuaries hide

In mercy of that privileged place,
Yet are their bodies so unsanctifide,

As scarce their souls can ever hope for grace ;
Whereas they still in want and feare abide,

A poore dead life that draweth out a space ;
Hate stands without, and horror sits within,

Prolonging shame, but pardoning not their sinne ! "

APPENDIX

SECULAR OR CIVIL SANCTUARIES— LATER
SANCTUARIES FOR DEBTORS

The object of the preceding pages is to give an
account of the mediaeval sanctuaries of England under
the control of the Church. There were other bye-
paths of the general subject which it has been found
impossible to include, even in the very briefest form —
such are the immunities pertaining to royal palaces,
and to the residences of ambassadors.

A few words may, however, here be added as to
what may be considered as Secular or Civil Sanctu-
aries. These chiefly existed in the county palatine of
Chester, and full particulars can readily be found in
the pages of Lysons or Ormerod. The power of
granting sanctuary protection to criminals was in the
hands of the Earls of Chester, and was the source
of considerable emolument, for they received fines
from all such persons as came to reside under their
protection — a heriot at their death, and all their goods
and chattels in the event of their dying without issue.
Hook Heath, near Chester, Rudheath, near Middle-
wich, and Overmarsh, near Farndon, were the chief
places assigned for this purpose ; in the last of these,
those seeking the Earl's protection might reside for
a year and a day, but only in temporary dwellings,
such as booths or tents. Debtors had special privileges
in this county, for a debtor on swearing before the
Court of Exchequer at Chester that he would pay his
debts as soon as he was able, could obtain a writ of
protection which secured him from molestation by his

336 SANCTUARIES

creditors. In Chester itself there was a like custom
from very early days. Any freeman having been
imprisoned for debt and unable to pay, could go
before the Mayor, and on swearing that he would
discharge his debt as soon as he could, reserving to
himself only a " mean sustentation," he had a right
to be discharged from imprisonment. This custom
assumed another shape in the sixteenth century, when
any freeman imprisoned for debt, on appealing to the
Mayor and Aldermen, was allowed to reside in a build-
ing called " The Free Home," and walk at large
within certain wide but defined liberties. He was
expected to attend divine service at the church of
St. John's, without the north gate, but was not allowed
to go into any private dwelling-house.

As to the illicit survival of sanctuary for debtors
in London, for a century after the general obliteration
of sanctuaries in 1624, a whole volume might be
readily compiled, but it would be a sordid and a
sorry tale. In 1626 an Act was passed for preventing
for the future " the many notorious and scandalous
practices used in many pretended privileged places in
and about the Cities of London, Westminster, and the
Borough of Southwark, thereby defrauding and cheat-
ing great numbers of people of their honest and just
debts." It was thereby enacted that after the first of
May any creditor might issue legal process against any
debtor, although resident within the Minories, Salis-
bury Court, Whitefriars, Fulwood's Rents, Mitre
Court, Baldwin's Gardens, the Savoy, the Clink,
Deadman's Place, Montague Close, and the Mint.
Nevertheless a certain amount of security was main-
tained in some of these infamous resorts until routed
by the more explicit legislation of 1727.

INDEX

Abbots Kerswell Church, 208
Abingdon Abbey, 205-7
Abjuration of the Realm, 9-33,

114, 170
Abjurors beheaded, 32, 244, 264,

275, 277, 30s

clothes, 32

distance to journey, 28-30

Acca, Bishop of Hexham, 162
Accounts of the Obedientiars of

Abingdon Abbey, 207
Acle, 30

Acraman, John, 143
Acts of King Stephen, 154, 156
Acts of the Parliament of Scot-
land, 315
Acts of the Privy Council, 231,

311

Adam Muriinuth, 210

Adel, 123

Ainstable, 177

Alderbury, 287

Aldestowe, 299

Alexander's Bull, Pope, 86, 88

Alfred the Great, 7

Alfreton, 285

All Hallows, Haywharf, London,

230
All Saints by London Wall, 330
All Saints, York, 123, 134, 295
Alnwick, 157, 288
Alton's Register, 249
Alured, Master, 131, 133, 134
Alvediston, 287
Alwinton, 288
Amesbury, 3I) 287
Amroth, 309
Ancient Laws and Institutes of

England, 8
Ancient Laws and Institutes of

Wales, 309
Anglo-Norman Laws, g
Anglo-Saxon Law Codes, 6-8

Annalegh, 301

Annates Monastici, 193

Anstey's Munimenta Academica,
47

ArchcEologia, 49, 179

Archceologia Cambrensis, 309

Archangel Cross, Ripon, 165

Arden Forest, 99

Armathwaite, Priory of, 177-81

Armathwaite Sanctuary Cross,
180

Arnold's Memorials of St. Ed-
munds Abbey, 204

Articuli Cleri, 317

Arundel, 256-58

Ashill, 297

Ashton West, 287

Assize and Coroners' Rolls, 19, 25,
223, 225, 242, 270-307

Aston, 296

Asylums, Greek, 2

■ Jewish, 2

Roman, 2

Athelstan, 7, 126, 133, 143, 151,
152, 163, 214, 220, 222, 223

Athelstane Close, 165

Athelstan's Laws, 7

Attleborough, 30

Audeley of Colchester, Abbot
William, 197

Austin Friars' Church, Ludlow, 21

Avebury Bavant, 287

Axbridge, 296, 297

Aylesbury, 266

Bagborough, 297
Bagnal, Thomas, 93
Baldock, Bishop Ralph, 250
Baldock's Register, 252
Baldwin's Gardens, 336
Baliol, Edward de, King of Scot-
land, 169
Balliol, Bernard de, 156

34°

INDEX

Dupsal, Geoffrey, 17

Durham, 32, 33, 80, 95-126, 152,

252, 253
Durham Registers, analysis of

sanctuary seekers, 107-118
Duringwick, 257

Eardulf, Bishop, 96
Ealdhun, Bishop, 97
Easton, 271, 287
East Pennard, 296
Ecton, 304-305
Edgar, King, 50, 53, 199, 202
Edmund, King, 202
Edward II., 163

v., 61-70

■ VI., 61

Edward de Baliol, King of Scot-
land, 169
Edward the Confessor's Laws, 8,

50- 53) 199
Eglos, 301
Egred, Bishop, 181
Ely, 260, 266

Episcopal Registers, 243-60
Eriswell, 30
Estfield, William, 82
Ethelbald, 201
Ethelbert's Laws, 6
Etheldred, Abbot of Rievaulx, 104
Ethelred's Laws, 8
Exeter, 298

Fairless, Mr., 157
Falconer, Thomas, 57
Fame Island, 95
Feckenham, John, 74
Ferrers, Sir Ralph, 51, 52
Fittleton, 287

Fitz Osbert, William, 39, 40
Florence of Worcester, 106
Ford, 296
Fordham, 242
Ford wick, 241
Forrest, Michael, 92
Forster, Mr. R. H., 125
Fowey, 26

" Free Home, The," 336
Fremington, 298

Frithman or Grithman, 6, 118,
144-47, 164, 168, 174, 176, 224
Frith Stool, Beverley, 127-29, 134
— Hexham, 157-59

Frith Stool, York, 151
Froissart's Chronicles, 55
Frumpington, 242
Fulwood's Rents, 336

Gaunt, John of, 44, 51, 52
Gayton, 29
Gee, Rev. Dr., 125
Gentlemaiis Magazine, 179
Gent's History of Rip on, 165
Geoffrey, Archbishop of York,

36-8
Geoffrey of Monmouth, 131
Giffard, Abbot Walter, 192
Giffard's Registers, 243, 246, 247
Girard, Archbishop, 79, 150
Glastonbury, 86, 202-203, 297
Gloucester, 27, 203-204

Richard, Duke of, 61

St. Nicholas Church, 120,

122, 123
Gratian's Canon Law, 4
Gray's Register, 260
Gray, William, Bishop of Ely, 258
Greek Asylums, 2
Grey Friars Chronicle, 231
Grim, Edward, 35
Gross, Professor, 273
Gunnerton, 288
Guthred, 96, 120

HaDSTONE, 172

Halkerston's Palace and Sanctu-
ary of Holyroodhouse, 314

Hallam's Middle Ages, 332

Hampton Court, 327

Hamptworth, 287

Harford, 297

Harpham-on-the- Wolds, 132

Harpole, 304

Harrod, Mr., 235

Harthill, 284

Hartland, 124

Hastings, 242

Battle of, 195

Haverfordwest, 309

Hawley, Robert, 44, 51, 52

Haytesbury 287

Hearne's Otterbourne and Weth-
amstede, 170

Heckwold, 29

Heddon, 173

Helston, 300, 301

INDEX

341

Henna Knighton Leycestrensis

Chronicon, 35
Henry IV., 134

VI,, 83, 84

VII., 92, 93, 187, 319, 320

VIII., 33, 320, 323

Hertford, 296

Hertfordshire Assize Roll, 296

Hessle, 129

Hexham, 80, 132, 152, 153-162
Hexham crosses, 155, 156, 157,

1 60
Hexha?n, History c/j 154
Highworth, 287
Hilderton, 288
Hill Deverill, 287
Hindon, 287, 329, 330
Historia Croylandensis, 201

de Sancto Cuthberto, 96

Historical Manuscripts Commis-
sion, 173, 233

Historical Memorials of West-
minster Abbey, 48

History of the Gwydier Fa}nily,
310

Hodge's Hexham Abbey, 158, 159

Hody, Sir John, 86

Holds worth's History of English
Law, 22

Holinshed's Chronicles, 207

Holland, John, Duke of Exeter,

59

Holy Island, 182, 254

Holyrood, 313-14

Hook Heath, 335

Hook's Archbishops of Canter-
bury, 82

Horn, Andrew, 22

Horningham, 287

Houghton, 275

Howel Dda, Laws of, 308

Hubert de Burgh, 40-41

Walter, Archbishop of

Canterbury, 38-40

Hudard, Sheriff, 156
Hull, 26

Hunstanton, 238-39
Huntingdon, 268
Hutchinson's History of Cumber-
land, 180

ILFRACOMBE, 26, 298, 302
Ilton, 297

Ine, King, 7

Ingebric, 79

Ingleby, 285

Ingulf, 201

Ipswich, 26, 30

Irish sanctuaries, 315-18

Isabel, prioress of Armathwaite,

178
IsHp, Abbot, 72

Jewish cities of refuge, 25

temple, the, 2

John, King, 36, 37, 183

■ of Gaunt, 44, 51, 52

Justinian Laws, 4

Kaye, Richard, 247

Kellow, Richard, Bishop of Dur-
ham, 252, 254

Kempe's The Church of St.
Martin le Grand, 80, 94

Kenulf, King, 205

Kilhampton, 301

Kingston-on-Thames, 290, 291

Kinwalgraves, 128

Kipernol, 29

Kneve, Henry, 82

Knighton's Chronicle, 35, 55

Knights Hospitallers of St. John,

309, 31°
Knowle, 324, 325

Lacock, 287

Lancaster, 26

Laneast, 301

Langar, 303

Langdon's Old Cornish Crosses,
219, 222

Lanhilton, 300

Lanivet, 301

Lantegos, 300

Lapsley's County Palatine of
Durham, 1 1 8

Large, Thomas, 83

Launceston, 299, 300, 301, 326

Laverok, Dr., 258

Laverstoke, 287

Lay, William de, 244-46

Layton, Dr., 188

Leach, Mr. A. F., 131

Leach's Visitations and Memo-
rials of Southwell Minster,
152

342

INDEX

Lee, Edward, Archbishop of

York, 146, 160
Leith, 315
Leland, 128, 221
Leland's Collectanea, 194,311

Itinerary, 215

Lengleyse, John, 16
Leobwine, 106

Leominster Priory, 208-209, 248
Leschman's Chantrey, Prior, 159
Letters and Papers, Henry VIII.,

322, 324
Leitga, 127, 151, 196, 215
Levitical cities of refuge, I, 25
Lezant, 301
Libellusde Admirandis Beati

Cuthberti Vertutibus, 97-106
Liber Albus, 150, 228

Custtimarum, 230

Lichfield, 279

Liddington, 287

Lincoln Cathedral, 209-13, 305

Lindisfarne, 95, 96, 97, 181

Lingard's History of England,

45.46
Linlithgow, 315
Little Comberton, 247

Torrington, 124

Llandaff, 249, 250

London, City of, 227-32

Longbeard, 39-40

Longchamp, William, 36, 37, 38

Looe, 26, 301

Lostwithiel, 26, 300, 301

Loughor, 309

Loughrea, 317

Lovell, Lord, 207

Lower, Mr. M. A., 196

Lower's Battle Abbey Chronicle,

197
Lowick, 288
Lucius' Bull, Pope, 88
Luddington, 276
Ludlow, 21 249
Lumby's Polyclironicon Ran-

ulphi Higden, 5 3
Lynn, 26, 29
Lyson's Cornwall, 217

Cuinberland, 180

Lyulph, 106

Machyn's Diary, 74
Maiden Cross, the, 157

Maitland, Professor, 22, 270

Malmesbury, 287

Malmesbury's De Gestis Ponti-

ficuin, 9, 106
Malverne's Chronicle, 5^, 55,

56
Manby, Peter de, 17
Manchester, 326, 327, 328
Manningford, 287
Mansfield, 303
Marches, Laws of the, 314
Mare, Peter de la, 244-46
Margan Abbey, 311
Margaret, Queen, 185-86
Marlborough, 287
Marlock, 297
Marston, 297

Magna, 297

Marton, 20

Mary, Queen, 148

Material for the History of

Thomas Becket, 35
Mauliverer, John, 17
Maxey, 304
Mazzinghi's Sanctuaries, 278,

330
Melton, Archbishop, 143
Memorials of Hexham, 154

of Old Yorkshire, 133

Merton Priory, 41

Meschin, Ranulf, 174

Midsummer Norton, 297

Mildenhall, 30

Milling, Abbot, 61

Milton Abbas, 289

Milverton, 297

Minories, the, 336

Mint, the, 336

Mirror of fustice, 11, 24, 27

Mitford Castle, 173, 174, 288

Mitre Court, 336

Molescroft, 129

Monasteries, suppression of the,

188
Monkseaton, 167
Monks' Stone, Tynemouth, 167
Monmouth, 249
Montague Close, 336
Monyash, 286
More, Sir Thomas, 92
Mortimer, Roger de, 17
Morval, 301
Motcombe, 289

INDEX

343

Mowbray, Earl Robert de, 170
Mundford, 29

Najara, battle of, 51

Narbeth, 309

Narford, 29

Nazianzen, Gregory, 3

Neale and Brayley's Westminster
Abbey, 52

Neath, 311

Nevill, Mr. Ralph, 269

Earl of Warwick, 185

Newark, 26, 302

Newcastle-on-Tyne, 26, 252, 288

New History of Northumberland,
171

Newlyn, 301

Newton Abbot, 208

Sir Richard, 86

Nicolas' Privy Council Proceed-
ings, 327

Niger Quarternus, 70

Niger, Roger, Bishop of London,
42

NoUoth, Canon, 131, 133

Nonne Close, the, 178

Norfolk Archaology, 234

Norham Church, 181-82, 254

Normanton, 283

Northallerton, 28

Northampton, 19, 276, 326

Northamptonshire Coroners'
Rolls, 276-78, 303, 304

Northover^ 296

North Petherton, 297

Northumberland Assize Rolls,
287

Northumberland, New History
of 171

Norton, 287

Norwell, 303

Norwich, 30, 234-40, 326

St. Gregory, 124, 234-35

William de, Dean of Lin-
coln, 212

Notes and Queries, 50

Nottinghamshire Coroners' Rolls,
302

Nunwick, 165

Ogbourne St. George, 287
Oldhall, Sir William, 87-89
Oliver, Bishop of Lincoln, 20

Orange, Council of, 4

Orleans, Synod of, 4

Orleton, Bishop Adam de, 248

Ormerod, 194, 335

Orwell, 26

Osbert, 150

Oswald, Archbishop of, 199

Oswaldston, 271

Otho, papal legate, 192

Otterford, 296

Ottobone, Constitution of, 251

Oundle, 276

Overmarsh, 335

Overton, 254

Oxford, 19, 293

Coroners' Rolls, 293

Times, The, 295

Padstow, 26, 299, 300, 301

Cross, 221-22

Sanctuary, 220-26

Page, Mr., 288

Papal decretals, 4

Paris, Matt., Chronica Majora,

44
Paston Letters, 92
Patent and Close Rolls, 261-69
Paule, John, 56
Paulinus, 3
Paulton, 296
Peakirk, 304

Pecham, Archbishop, 191
Pegge, Dr. Samuel, 179
Pennant Melangell, 311
Penrice, 309
Penryn, 301

Perkin Warbeck, 186-88
Peterborough, 304
Philip, Robert Fitz, 103-105
Pilgrimage of Grace, 323
Pilton, 297
Placita de Quo Warranto, 153,

168
Pleas of Parliament, 53, 60
Plumbland, loi, 102
Plymouth, 26, 31, 186, 292
Pontefract, 323
Pontesbury, Thomas de, 200
Portmarnock, 316
Porton, 287
Ports of embarkation for abjurors,

26
Portsmouth, 26, 28, 31, 236

344

INDEX

Post Office, the General, 94

Potteme, 287

Poulshot, 287

Poulson's History ef Beverley, 128

Ponton, 300

Prescot, Archdeacon, 175

Preston Capes, 304

Priddy, 297

Prideaux Place, Padstow, 222

Prior Leschman's chantry, 159

Privy Council Acts, the, 78

Proceedings of the Soaety of A nti-

guaries, 124
Proceedings of the Soc. of Antiq.

of Newcastle, 182
Purton, 287
Pylle, 297

QUANTOXHEAD, 297

Ramsey Abbey, 200-201
Reade's Register, 256, 258
Reading Abbey, 248
Record Office, Domestic State

Papers, 72, 78
Records of the City of Norwich,

240
Red Book of the Exchequer in

Irejfind, 317
Redruth, 302
Rees, Mr. J. Roger, 309
Reginald, monk, 97-106
Reoister of the Priory of Wether-

hal, 175
Registrum fohannis Pecham, 191
Reports of Hist. MSS. Commis-
sion, 7 1
Reville's Habjuratio regni; his-

torie d'une institution anglaise,

12
Richard II., 81

Duke of Gloucester, 61-70

Duke of York, 61-70, 186

Prior of Hexham, 154-56

'RWey's Mejnorials of Lo7idon, 58,

229, 230
Ripen, 97, 126, 152, 162-65, 176

crosses, 165

Rites of Durham, the, 119-20, 122
Rittershusius' De fure Asylortim,

5
Rochester, 26, 302
Rodborne, 287

Rolls of Parlia7nent, 17, 19, 82,
185, 186, 206, 217

Roman altars and statues as
sanctuaries, 2

Romilly Allen's Christian Sym-
bolism, 220

Roses, Wars of the, 185

Rothbury, 288

Rotuli ScoticE, 169, 176

Royal Peace, 6

Rudheath, 335

Rugeley, 280

Russell, John, 57, 58

Rye, 242

Rymer's Fadera, 320

St. Albans, Abbey of, 166, 209,

296
St. Ambrose, 3
St. Anthony in Meneage, 300
St. Anthony in Roseland, 300
St. Basil, 3

St. Buryan crosses, 217-20
St. Buryan sanctuary, 214-20, 301
St. Ceolwulf, 181
St. Cross, 300
St. Cuthbert, 95-120, 181
St. Decuman, 296
St. Edmund of Bury, 105
St. Etheldreda of Ely, 105
St. Ewyn, 301
St. Frideswide, Oxford, 9
St. Germans, 300
St. Gregory,Norwich, 124, 234-35
St. Gulval, 300
St. Guthlac, 201, 202
St. Hilary, 301
St. Hugh, Bishop of Lincoln,

209-13
St. John of Beverley, 126, 127,

131, 132, 133, 141, 143
St. Kevern, Cornwall, 262
St. Keyne, 300, 301
St. Mabyn, 300
St. Maker, 300
St. Margaret, Southwark, 269
St. Martin-by-Looe, 300
St. Martin's le Grand, 33, 44, 79-

94, 320
St. Martin's, Canterbury, 232
St. Martin's Priory, 38
St. Mary le Bow, 39, 229
St. Mary's, York, 175, 176

INDEX

345

St. Melan juxta Penryn,3oo

St. Michael's Mount, 300, 301

St. Neots, 274

St. Nicholas, Gloucester, 120,
122, 123

St. Oswald, Gloucestershire, 161

St. Oswin, 166, 167, 171

St. Paul's, London, 227, 229

St. Peter of Heckwold, 29

St. Peter of York, 27

St. Peter's, London, 227

St. Petroc, 221-27

St. Pinnock, 301

St. Quintin, 301

St. Teath, 301, 302

St. Thomas of Canterbury, mur-
der of. 34-35) 105

St. Tudy, 302

St. Veep, 302

St. Wilfrid, 153-62

St. Wynnow, 302

Salisbury Court, 336

Sanctuaries, chartered, 33

Sanctuaries, decay and extinc-
tion of, 319-33

Sanctuaries, secular and civil,
335-36

Sanctuary crosses, 128-30

Sanctuary Incidents in cities,
227-42

"Sanctuary Knockers," 120, 235

Sanctuary, when allowed, 23

when not allowed, 23

Sandwich, 26, 29, 235

Savoy, the, 336

Scardeburgh, Richard de, 20

Schalby's Lives of the Bishops of
Lincoln, ill

Scilly Isles, 214, 215, 223

Scotch sanctuaries, 312-15

Scrope, Lady, 60, 61

Seagry, 287

Sebert, King, 50

Sede Vacante Register, 247

Sedgeford, 265

Selden Society, it,, 270, 273

Select Pleas from the Coroners''
Rolls, 273

Select Pleas of the Crown, 270

Shackel, John, 51

Sharow Cross, 165

Shaw, 287

Sheen Priory, 188

Shenstone, 281

Sherborne Abbey, 208

Sherston, 287

Shrewsbury Castle, 21

Simeon of Durham, 96, 106, 181

Skelton, John, 71, 72

Slebech Commandery, 309, 310

Smithfield, 57

Soklinton, 173

Somersetshire Assize Rolls, 296-7

Southampton, 26, 28

South Molton, 298

Southoe, 274

Southwark, 336

Southwell sanctuary, 150-53

Spalding, 242

Speed's Historie oj Great Bri-

taine, 60, 62
Spelby, Richard, 27
Spelman's Glossary, 128
Spital, Hexham, the, 161, 162
Stafford, 263, 281, 328
Staffordshire Assize Roll, 278-82
Standon, 281
Stanley, Dean, 52
Stanley's Historical Memorials of

Westtninster Abbey, 48, 331
Stanley, James, 92, 93
Star Chamber, the, 84, 89
Statutes of the Realm, 18, 20
Stephen, Bishop of London,

230
Stevens, Thomas, 189
Stirling, 315
Stone, John, 82
Stonewall, Prior John, 170
Stow, 305
Stowmarket, 31
Stow's Survey of London, 50, 93,

94
Stratford St. Cross, 287
Stratton, 287, 301, 302
Streatham, 255
Stretton, 301
Stukeley, Dr., 49
Sudbury, 274, 275
Surmyn, Robert, 57
Surrendell, 287
Surrey Archceological Collections,

269
Surrey Assize Roll, 290
Surtees Society, the, 98, 130,

131. 154, 163, 167, 288

346

INDEX

Sussex Arch. Coll.., 259
Swansea, 241

Swinfield's Register, 249, 250
Synod of Orleans, 4
Syon House, 173

Tattersett, 29
Taunton, 297
Taverstock, 298
Tesdeyl, Allen de, 16
Tewing, Prior Richard de, 174
Tewkesbury, battle of, 186
Textus Roffensis, 9
Theodosian Code, the, 3-5
Thetford, 30

Thorpe-in-the-Glebe, 302
Thorpe's Anaent Laws, 5
Thurston, Archbishop, 156
Tintagel, 300
Tintern Abbey, 194
Topham, Mr., 130
Torrington, 298

Townsend's History of Leomin-
ster, 209!
Tregony, 301
Trenholme's Right of Sanctuary,

3, 12, 33
Tresilian, Sir Robert, 55, 56
Trevorgan's Cross, 218
Trewin, 300
Truro, 300-302
Trywern, 301
Tudor, Owen, 70
Tynemouth, 26, 166-74, 176
Tyrell, Sir William, 92

Uffculme, 298
Upton, 297

Vale Royal Abbey, 193-94

Vera, Countess of Oxford, Eliza-
beth de, 92

Victoria County Histoiy of Cum-
berland, 181

Victoria County Histo7y of Dur-
ham, 125

Victoi-ia Coujity History of Hamp-
shire, 256, 324, 325

Victoria County History oj Lon-
don, 80

Visitations and Memorials of
Southwell Mijtster, 152

Vita Oswini, 167

Vita S. Hugonis Lincolniensis,
210, 211

Walbran's Ripon, 165
Walcher, Bishop, 106
Walcot, 297
Walcott, Prebendary Mackenzie,

48, 208
Walden, Richard de, 244-46
Walkington, 129, 130
Waltham, 296
Walthamsted, 296
Walthon, William of, 130
Wanborough, 287
Warbeck, Perkin, 45, 186-88, 319
Warding, 18
Warkworth, 172
Wars of the Barons, 333
Wars of the Roses, 185
Warwick, 273

Neville, Earl of, 185

Waterford, 240
Waverley Abbey, 191
Wawe, William, 184
Week St. Mary, 302
Wells, 326

Welsh sanctuaries, 308-12
West Chinnock, 297

Putford, 124

Westminster, 33, 44, 4;, 48-78,

86, 93, 148, 177, 323, 326, 332,

336
Westminster Hospital, 332
West Whelpington, 1 73
Wetherhal Priory, 174-76
Whelpington, 288
Whitaker, Mr., 22
White Book of Soitthwell, The,

150
Whitefriars, 336
White Sand Bay, 186
Wiglaf, 201-202
William, King of Scotland, loi

of St. Carileph, Bishop, 97

Rufus, 177, 178

the Conqueror, 79, 97, 134,

185
the Conqueror's Laws, 9, 85,

94
Williton, 297
Wilton, 287, 291, 293
Wiltshire Assize Roll, 286-87
Coroners' Rolls, 291

INDEX

347

Wilts Natural History and
Archaological Magazine, 330

Notes and Queries, 29 1

Winchelsea, 26
Winchester, 254, 255
Windsor, 262, 263
Winsford, 297
Winterborne Gunner, 287
Winterslow, 287
Wolmer, George, 71
Woodville, Elizabeth, 60, 70
Wootton, 277
Wolsey, Cardinal, 169
Worcester, 243-48, 271, 273
Worton, 287
Wretham, 29

Wriothesley, Thomas, Earl of,

Southampton, 189
Wykeham, William, 254, 256
Wynn, Sir John, 310
Wytchcote, 297

Yarmouth, 26, 29, 30, 235,

236
Yatton, 297
Yeovil, 297
York, 28, 150-53,264,326

All Saints, 123, 124

Coroners' Rolls, 295

Episcopal Registers, 142-43

Geoffrey, Archbishop of,

36-38

THE END

Printed by Ballantyne, Hanson &= Co.
Edinburgh 6= London